Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009)

[Christoph Wickert]

Am Samstag, den 25.04.2009, 12:20 -0400 schrieb Paul W. Frields:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 05:37:13AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > On 04/17/2009 05:21 AM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > > On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Robert Scheck wrote:
> > > 
> > >> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > >>> Let's face it: ATM the changes have caused confusion and discomfort in
> > >>> the Fedora community. For example fedora.de has been taken offline
> > >>> because of discrepancies between the trademark holder and the domain
> > >>> owner. Robert as the domain owner is a well known and valuable
> > >>> contributor of the project and all AFAIK all he did was redirecting to
> > >>> fedoraproject.org.
> > >> I'm really pissed, but still hope that Paul comes up with something soon.
> > >>
> > > 
> > > I'm not familiar with the text of the contract but I wanted to mention
> > > something to those who might idly be following this thread to note that
> > > Red Hat, as owners of the Fedora name, has to protect it everywhere it
> > > knows about it.  My understanding is if we don't protect it in one case,
> > > we lose the protection everywhere.  So even though the text of the
> > > contract might be over zealous[1], the contract has to exist in some form.
> > > As long as both sides stick to it, I'm sure a good middle ground will be
> > > found.
> > > 
> > > 	-Mike
> > > 
> > > [1] I have no idea what the contract says
> > 
> > Shouldn't it be made public?
> 
> Refer to:
>   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_license_agreement

Is this all you have to say about it? If so, you are proving what I
wrote previously: "Things like these are hard to understand. There might
be good reasons, but IMO the board does a bad job ATM in communicating
their views to the outside world."

I still don't get why Robert has to has to follow rules when mirroring
fpo if these rules not even apply to the fpo website itself. Why are
rules for community members stricter than for Red Hat or the Fedora
Project? How are we supposed to understand the meaning of the agreement,
when there are no translations? You cannot expect someone to sign a
contract if he doesn't even understand it's content.

To be honest: I don't understand this whole fedoracommunity.org thing,
because the previous consensus was to collect everything at fpo. Again I
kindly ask the board members to explain, when/how things have changed
and point me to the relevant mails, irc logs or whatever.

TIA,
Christoph