Please click here for the full version of the statutory declaration (in PDF).
02 August 2005 04:20 PM
Tags: linux, linus torvalds, jeremy malcolm, trademark, ip australia, linux mark institute, marc englaro, letter
Please click here for the full version of the statutory declaration (in PDF).
Like this article? Click below to send it to your mobile for free!
John,
I take you are being purposefully obstinate or painfull in your response.
I also take it you understand that this payment ($300-$600) relates to firms which want to refer to the 'Linux' brand in their product names or services?
Linus owns the trademark Linux. If you want to use that mark, then you need to licence it.
If you _dont_ want to use the term 'Linux' in reference to your products, but you still want to use the Linux software itself, then you are free to do so, at zero cost.
What part of this don't you understand?
Or are you trolling on behalf of the Microsoft apologists?
> Or are you trolling on behalf of the Microsoft apologists?
<p><br />
<p>Absolutely. As he always does. Ignore him. He's a well known troll.
This has nothing to do with Microsoft...The UNIX foundation charges a very large sum of money to companies to enable them to call their product UNIX. This smelt of the same thing, paying to use the name Linux, though Linux is free by its nature. I can only assume this is an IP protection system though shared IP is the linux way.
John,
you said:
"This has nothing to do with Microsoft...The UNIX foundation charges a very large sum of money to companies to enable them to call their product UNIX. This smelt of the same thing, paying to use the name Linux, though Linux is free by its nature. I can only assume this is an IP protection system though shared IP is the linux way."
The aim of the current legal approach is to ensure that firms only use the trademark 'Linux' for its intended purpose.
And if include 'Linux' in your product or service naming, then you have to pay a once-off 'few hundred dollars" for the privelege.
No big deal right.
It's about the term "Linux" not being misused. And $300 to $600 isn't pretty much for a company.
There are a couple of Linux distros that are exact copies of RedHat, using the SRPMS. CentOS, for example. Trademark protection appears to be the only protection RedHat has in this case. And they still make money. They just require CentOS and others to remove all logos and references to RedHat before distributing their exact copy. If I remember correctly, RedHat makes most of their money off of services anyway. They are my heros... Even if I don't really like to use their distro, or their default Window Manager, or...
Lawyer has not asked for money, letter explicitly says that it is not asking for money or anything of the sort, FAQ (http://www.ilaw.com.au/linuxfaq.html) says "no money, no instructions to seek money". Perhaps ZDnet should have asked before posting?
The entire purpose of the letter is to get Australian businesses selling products with "Linux" in their name to clarify their positions.
Don't expect anything like so gentle an approach if you use "Adobe" or "Windows" in your product name,
Conroy ducks, Ballmer evades and Android Fails -- Club Builder
Club Builder this week takes a long look at Senator Conroy's recent attempt to explain his Great Firewall of A… Watch it now
Is green IT a marketing fad?
Gutless studios have the wrong target
NBN needs workers on board
'At The Whiteboard' Video Series
Click here to learn more about Microsoft Windows Server 2008 and Hyper-V technology.
Click here for more.
CXO's Unplugged - Real Business Insight
Phil Dobbie interviews business leaders to reveal their thoughts on various management challenges.
Click here to see the latest video.
Printer Superguide
Looking to buy a printer? Our superguide rates the latest printers and shines a light into the industry.
Click here for more.
Looks like it's free as long as Linus is happy, otherwise no better than Unix. You pay lots of money to call your OS a version of Unix, looks like profiteering to me