Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux

Greg Mildenhall (greg@networx.net.au)
Wed, 23 Dec 1998 04:45:03 +0800 (WST)


On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, George Bonser wrote:
> On 22 Dec 1998, Mirian Crzig Lennox wrote:
>
> I think the bottom line is this. If I packaged Windows without any
> Microsoft programs, with only GNU stuff that can port to Windows, I would
> not be allowed to call it GNU/Windows. My butt would be hauled into court
> and I would have to change it.
No, your butt would be hauled into court for breaking your license
agreement, regardless of what you called it. Then they might sue you for
using their trademark if you still had some cash left.

> I could not even call it GNU Windows. It is Microsoft Windows.
> I am not allowed to change the name of someone elses product.
> I could call it Windows with GNU software or GNU with Windows or
> GNU for Windows but I could not call it GNU/Windows.
Ummm, that's not changing the name of their product. You've just made a
new product. You've done nothing to the name of their product.

> So, having said that, Red Hat Linux with GNU is ok as is Red Hat GNU for
> Linux, or S.u.S.E. Linux and GNU but GNU and Linux are two different
> things, Linux is not GNU and GNU is not Linux.
So by this argument, "Redhat Linux" should be known as "Redhat for Linux",
right? There is no difference, except perhaps "Redhat Linux" sounds like
they made Linux, whereas the slash in "GNU/Linux" makes it more clear they
are two seperate entities.

> There is no such thing as GNU/Linux because GNU does not own Linux unless
> Linus says it does.
Ummm, that's why it's not called "GNU's Linux". Perhaps your mailer
confuses "/" with "'s"? You should have it seen to. :)
So now we have "Redhat with GNU and Linux and some BSD stuff, and Apache,
and the GIMP, and netscape, and a thousand other little progs that don't
fall into any of those categories, pickles onions on a sesame seed bun and
a partridge in a pear tree (V 5.2)".
Hmmm, bit of a mouthful. I can see why they trimmed it down to "Redhat
Linux". Of course, since the chances are there is more GNU code in there
than Redhat-written code and kernel code put together (IANAStatistician:)
I can also understand why Debian call their system Debian GNU/Linux.

-Greg Mildenhall

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/