steppenwolf1984 Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 Well, it seems theres a mild hysteria brewing on the trademark linux issue in Australia. People ranting about hypocrisy and open sauce (sic). Seems people are confusing a copyright with a patent...which the FSF, and I assume Linus as well, are fervently opposed to. Lots of screaming about Linux now costing money (in reality it costs money if you make and sell your product in profit making mode and use the name LINUX on it) although you can still run the system, change the system, etc....just dont call it Linux unless you want to pay a registration fee. If you are liable to pay such a fee.... Mad Dog Hall is trying to issue statements to chill people out. Major point? If Linus and co. dont get trademark protection, which costs lawyer and court fees; we might see a MacroShaft Linux any day. I will sacrifice my first borne male son to prevent that happening. You wanna make a buck with the L word? Fork over the greens..... Anybody else watching this little drama unfold? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devries Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 It's been on /. twice (not a dupe, a followup). :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexter11 Posted August 22, 2005 Report Share Posted August 22, 2005 It's a FUD. The name Linux is only trademarked because a guy called William R. Della Croce trademarked it and wanted 10% after every commercial distro in 1995. The trademark has been returned to Linus in 1997 and he is the owner since then. He will not charge for using the name Linux. He never did and I think he never will. Because compannies would simply stop using it. About the MS Linux distro. Sorry to disappoint you steppenwolf but MS could release their Linux distro anytime they want just like everybody else. They are not doing it cause it's no busines for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenwolf1984 Posted August 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2005 It's a FUD. The name Linux is only trademarked because a guy called William R. Della Croce trademarked it and wanted 10% after every commercial distro in 1995. The trademark has been returned to Linus in 1997 and he is the owner since then. He will not charge for using the name Linux. He never did and I think he never will. Because compannies would simply stop using it.About the MS Linux distro. Sorry to disappoint you steppenwolf but MS could release their Linux distro anytime they want just like everybody else. They are not doing it cause it's no busines for them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Not with the name Linux they cant. Thats what the TM does for starters. Bill could copy the system if he thought he could get over and rename it, but some people are confusing copyright with patent. And there is money being paid - at least in Australia - for commercially developing that name. Aussie companies are putting out a local version and calling it (name) Linux. The name is trademarked and prevents problems with people abusing the name and the rep of all things Linux. The payment is for licensing the name in a for-profit business. Of course, anyone can copy the code and produce a system (because open source is anti software PATENT) and call it Smurfs from Hell, but the minute they call it Linux ® they have to register their company. Which costs money for all concerned including Linus. Theres grumbling out there that Linux is suddenly no longer "free" which is erroneous. If you wanna use that name to make your first million, register with the Linux Mark people. Its more of an uninformed low grade panic rather than a FUD campaign ( I hope) because it seems antithetical that you would have to "pay" for Linux. Youre not, youre paying for the name, and for whatever org it is in charge of that name, to keep showing up for court dates and paying legal counsel, to keep the SS Linux running smoothly. Wanna sell Linux without paying? Just call it something else....easy. After all, how many people dont know that Debian is Linux? Whats in a name? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexter11 Posted August 23, 2005 Report Share Posted August 23, 2005 After reading kerneltrap I got the idea that one can use the name Linux to whatever distro/software etc. even for commercial purposes. But if he want the name to be unique so no more distro/software etc. has the same name, he has to trademark it. If he wants the word Linux to be included in the distro/software etc. trademarked name then he has to sublicense the Linux trademark. So paying for using the word Linux for everyone is totally out of the question. One more thing as Linus wrote the sublicensing costs different to persons and companies so that 5000$ is just a made up number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenwolf1984 Posted August 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2005 After reading kerneltrap I got the idea that one can use the name Linux to whatever distro/software etc. even for commercial purposes. But if he want the name to be unique so no more distro/software etc. has the same name, he has to trademark it. If he wants the word Linux to be included in the distro/software etc. trademarked name then he has to sublicense the Linux trademark. So paying for using the word Linux for everyone is totally out of the question. One more thing as Linus wrote the sublicensing costs different to persons and companies so that 5000$ is just a made up number. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That about sums it up. The 5000 sublicense fee would theoretically apply to an established business, and is not necessarily a going rate. Nor does Linux Mark set out to "catch" everyone using the Linux name and shake em down for money. If anything its quite the opposite. Perhaps thats where the FUD tactics come in, trying to paint the Linux movement as hypocritical. Combined with misperceptions about what open source means, and even what "free" means, it caused a bit of a ruckus in the media. Since I work with Intellectual Property news, its something we're following, trying to pick out the fact from the fiction (FUDtion?) Nothing has really changed but the one event set off a minor media backlash which - in retrospect - does feed off of those fear , uncertainty and doubt instincts. Thanks for the link, btw... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyme Posted August 23, 2005 Report Share Posted August 23, 2005 The whole thing is explained very well in this story over at groklaw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenwolf1984 Posted August 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 24, 2005 The whole thing is explained very well in this story over at groklaw. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Great, comprehensive site on the whole issue including a bunch of links to anything related....thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.