output redistribution issues again, was Re: [Fedora-livecd-list] Kadischi: roadmap from Board meeting ?

[Jane Dogalt]

--- Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk at redhat.com> wrote:

> 
> Hold it, hold it, hold it.
> 
> Responses inline.

Holding it... :)  Unfortunately your responses seem a bit contradictory, see
below-

> 
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Jane Dogalt wrote:
> 
> > Chitlesh,
> > 
> >    Thank you for your answers here.  Unfortunately, I think you have
> > confirmed what I have suspected all along, but which I thought needed to
> > be spelled out.  I.e.
> > 
> > *** 
> >
> > There is a very limited subset of customizations a kadischi user may
> > make to their output, and still be 'legally' allowed to redistribute
> > their output.
> > 
> > Examples include- Including forbidden items, like nvidia drivers, mp3
> > support, etc. Doing things that are "hateful or stupid" in redhat or
> > fedora's subjective opinion.
> 
> Wrong.  You can include anything you like, and redistribute anything you
> like.  The *only* restriction is whether or not you can use the Fedora
> name on that redistribution.  

Ok.  I hesitate to pick more nits, because I feel like I've gotten a clear
reversal on the #2 situation in my historic post.  But to pick a nit-

"Using the Fedora name on that distribution" _only_ means what you name the
iso, and what you advertise the iso as, correct? 

Or does that extend to "using the fedora name _in_ that distribution".  I.e.

a) having fedora-logos.rpm installed, but not visible during a typical boot and
usage scenario?

b) having fedora-logos.rpm installed, and the fedora logo visible during
graphical boot and or default desktop background?

c) not having fedora-logos.rpm, but having many instances of the text string
buried in lots of places, including each rpm's metadata? 

> 
> The policy we're aiming for: if it's all Fedora stuff, you can use the
> Fedora name.  If it isn't, you can't.  Period.
> 
> > And I suspect from a 'legal' point of view, basically anything that goes
> > any distance beyond changing the package selection from purely within
> > the core and extras repository.  Because the instant you do anything
> > complicated like adding your own package that hasn't vetted the
> > core/extras quality control inclusion process, you are releasing a piece
> > of software whose quality will reflect on the fedora name, due to
> > implicit association.  Certainly if (a) default fedora boot/background
> > logos/images/trademarks are left in place.  And even to a lesser extent,
> > if the fedora-logos and anaconda images packages are left in place (am I
> > missing anything?). ***
> 
> We're not the least bit worried about implicit association.  Not at all.  
> It's free software.  The only thing we're worried about is *explicit* 
> association.  That's why we protect the marks themselves so rigorously.

This seems clear, in that leaving the fedora name in the graphical boot
sequence is in my mind _implicit_ association.  As opposed to putting an iso on
a website and saying "this is fedora linux: jdog live version", which would be
_explicit_ association.

But if my interpretation there is correct, then it doesn't seem there is an
actual need for the post-install cleanup script mentioned below (there is no
need, but it still might be a nice option).

So Greg, can you clear it up for me?  Can I install mp3 support, rewrite the
bootscripts so that they work for me, but generally make the distro look broken
and like a piece of crap for most other people because I didn't invest any time
quality-controlling my changes, leaving in the fedora graphics during graphical
boot and default desktop background, and then post the iso as jdog.iso
advertised as "jane dogalt's live OS"?

Would it make any difference if in addition to the above, on my website, I
called the distribution a "livecd derived from fedora core 5"?


>  
> > I am harping on this, because I think the issue confirms my need (and I
> > think it would vastly benefit the kadischi user community as well) for a
> > simple post install script which optionally makes the resulting
> > distribution "clean of any implied association or sponsorship by redhat
> > or fedora".
> 
> Agreed.  Make it happen.

Again, I think this is a useful thing to make happen.  But is that because it's
required for the above scenarios, or merely a nice option to have?

Thanks,

-jdog

>  
> > I'm hoping such a script isn't too terribly more complicated than rpm
> -e'ing
> > fedora-logos and anaconda-images.  A while back I saw all the .svg things
> in
> > there, and was worried that it would be hard to replace those with 'dummy'
> > items , but I tried out inkscape last night, and was truly amazed at how
> cool
> > that tool is.
> 
> Yep.  Should be pretty simple.
> 
> --g
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
> Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> --
> Fedora-livecd-list mailing list
> Fedora-livecd-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-livecd-list
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com