Request for Trademark Approval (Fedora AOS Spin)

[Jeroen van Meeuwen]

Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-08-28 at 23:57 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>> If they turn off all security and make 'honey pot linux - based on
>> fedora' as a livecd for catching would-be crackers, I have no problem
>> with that. It would be a good thing to have fedora's name on, I think.
>>
>> If they put apt in place (and modify massive amounts of anaconda, etc,
>> to make it all work) then why not?
>>
>> How does it hurt us?
> 
> You just said the magic words.  "Based on Fedora", which is not Fedora.
> I don't have a problem with people doing crazy ass things like taking
> out selinux, removing yum, or even replacing the entire runtime with our
> busybox, and calling it Based on Fedora.  It's when they call it Fedora
> that I get concerned.
> 

For the sake of argument, and the point I tried to make earlier, let's 
suppose the next proposed spin is "Fedora Different", purely intended to 
show the ultimate, most extreme amount of tweaking you can still do 
/within/ Fedora proper. Suppose the maintainers do the right thing so 
that when it excludes yum from the system and includes apt, they patch 
(upstream!) the entire toolchain and whatnot.

Would this be acceptable for Trademark approval?

If not, I suppose we're on our way to making a must-have and 
may-not-have/may-not-change feature list including packages and toolchains.

If it is, then such a list is moot and we're going the case-by-case route.

Kind regards,

Jeroen van Meeuwen
-kanarip