Hi Edward,
> I was originally going to post a long description of trademark law, but
> rather than have people feel that my motives were more than to help shed light
> on how trademarks works, I decided against it. Instead, if you're unsure about
> how trademarks work, do what I did -- run a couple google searches with the
> appropriate search terms, and read up on it...
The problem with this particular case is that you have a GPLed content that
can be freely distributed, but there is uncertainty on how to identify the
content. If people go to Cheapbytes they will probably not be buying "Green
Socks Linux 7.2" even though it is a verbatim copy of the FTP version of Red
Hat Linux 7.2.
Maybe you could reply to Robert's statement?
> Frankly, i don't see how red hat can prevent someone like
> cheapbytes from selling a distribution of linux entitled
> "an unsupported but exact copy of red hat 7.2". they wouldn't
> be claiming it's red hat 7.2, just something bit-for-bit
> identical to it on the physical CD. i fail to see how this
> would constitute a violation of red hat's trademark.
Bye,
Leonard.
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
