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

[Greg DeKoenigsberg]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Jane Dogalt wrote:

> 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"?

What's clearly required is a definition of "using the Fedora marks."

I will get a *very* explicit definition from legal, using your points as
reference.

--g

-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------