Fedora Dispute

[Erik Hemdal]

> > distribution.*  Red Hat admits that Cornell/UVA have prior 
> use and are not 
> [...]
> > The Cornell/UVA folks and some people in the community are 
> making more of 
> > this than they need to.  Red Hat is not the villain here.  
> They are just 
> > trying to protect the hard work they're doing with the 
> Fedora distribution. 
> > They have no desire to impinge on the Cornell/UVA folks, 
> and it is a pretty 
> > wild stretch of the imagination that this would ever happen.

That's a matter of opinion, and actually the only opinion that will matter
is that of the judge who hears a trademark case about it. :-)  Assuming that
the trademark actually issues to Red Hat and is not challenged.

Of course, Red Hat might not want to impinge on the Cornell/UVA
project...but it appears that Red Hat also doesn't want others using the
Fedora name for software that is not Red Hat's distribution.  Since Red Hat
is explicit about this on the Fedora web site, the Cornell and UVA folks
have a legitimate worry about an infringement action down the road.  All it
would take is a management change or policy change at Red Hat.  Or for that
matter, an attorney taking another look at things and deciding that the
Cornell/UVA team's work raises an infringement concern.  

Why would you post acceptable guidelines for use of your trademark, unless
you planned to defend that trademark later against others trying to use it?

Anything that can lead to legal action is something to think about,
especially if you lack funds to mount a defense.  

> 
> To me and you there isn't. To US trademark law, I don't think 
> it's so clear.
> Trademarks need to be unique within one of the 45 official 
> international
> classes of goods and services -- and class 42 is:
> 
>    CLASS 42 (Computer, scientific & legal)
> 
>    Scientific and technological services and research and 
> design relating
>    thereto: industrial analysis and research services; design and
>    development of computer hardware and software; legal services.
> 
> So, not only are operating systems and digital content 
> management systems
> not legally distinct, we're not even particularly distinct 
> from any other
> scientific services, or from legal services -- all the same 
> thing as far as
> trademark distinctiveness goes.
> 

This will be interesting to watch.  I think Matthew's posting here is
enlightening.

Erik

> 
> -- 
> Matthew Miller           mattdm at mattdm.org        
> <http://www.mattdm.org/>
> Boston University Linux      ------>                
> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
> Current office temperature: 73 degrees Fahrenheit.

Nice to know it's toasty warm at BU!  :-)