Fedora 7 "Moonshine": Freedom vs. Ease-of-Use (Part 1)
Bryan J. Smith
b.j.smith at ieee.org
Sun Jun 3 14:19:39 UTC 2007
On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 13:17 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> However we could spin it a lot better. "Fedora does not propose
> proprietary software it can't provide user support for" or "Fedora
> protects its users from lawsuits" sounds a lots better than "Red Hat
> does not want to be sued" or "Fedora objects to IP-encumbered software
> on principle" (even if all are true)
There are a thousand ways to phrase it. But some considerations ...
1. The term "proprietary"** is not always a "bad word," so it's good to
avoid using it in a way that throws that context.
**SIDE NOTE: As I've long argued from many different standpoints, the
majority of Microsoft software is _not_ even proprietary, but
Hostageware/Abandonware. Proprietary means the company actually gives
it genuine value and ensures its perpetual support.
2. The phrase "IP-encumbered" caters far better to corporations and
legal folk, and tells them "we've taken all your concerns -- patents and
other indemnification aspects -- into account."
3. The concept of "principle" can be a very positive aspect, and sends
the message that "with Fedora, you will be guaranteed X, Y and Z."
Just my $0.02, from a hardcore, American Libertarian and Capitalist and
long-time Red Hat product consultant at various organizations in North
America.
--
Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Fission Power: An Inconvenient Solution
More information about the marketing
mailing list