[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 19:43:08 +0000 Jonathan Roberts <jonathan.roberts.uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I have another question though: why isn't fedora considered a > >> "free" distribution on the FSF website. I understand why Debian > >> isn't, as it provides the "non-free" repos but Fedora Project > >> itself doesn't have anything like this. (I know livna etc but > >> they're separate from the project). > Either way the link is this: > http://www.gnu.org/links/links.html#FreeGNULinuxDistributions > > Although it doesn't expressely exclude Fedora it doesn't include it > either. The GNU page states: "We do not have links to web sites of the well-known GNU/Linux system distributions, or to the well-known BSD system distributions, because all those sites explicitly describe, and facilitate access to, various non-free programs. We would be glad to know of other Free Software web sites that we could link to here." Fedora is excluded because Fedora itself contains non-free code - i.e. the licence for all the Fedora images is non-free: "User must abide by these trademark guidelines when distributing the Software, regardless of whether the Software has been modified. If User modifies the Software, then User must replace all images containing the “Fedora” trademark. Those images are found in the anaconda-images and the fedora-logos packages. Merely deleting these files may corrupt the Software." This is the precise reason why FireFox is no longer in Debian. Debian's modifications were deemed incompatible with the Firefox name and Debian therefore renamed the modified version Iceweasel. Free software cannot exclude modification of any elements of the licenced package. Fedora restricts the right to modify the images (for understandable reasons), requiring a name change and complete replacement of all Fedora images. Therefore, the Fedora distribution itself contains non-free images. Even changing the colour of a Fedora image is breaking the licence. This is a contentious issue because companies expect icons to represent the company and therefore want to be able to mandate who has the right to display icons that they believe the public will associate with the company. The FSF are basically saying that "corporate identity" is non-free and, technically, they are correct. Even if Debian dropped contrib and non-free, GNU might not list Debian here - Debian has trademarks on the Debian icons (including the red swirl): “Debian” and the Debian Logo are trademarks of Software in the Public Interest, Inc. http://www.uk.debian.org/license "Although Debian can be obtained for free and will always remain that way, events such as the problem with the ownership of the term “Linux” have shown that Debian needs to protect its property from any use which could hurt its reputation." http://www.uk.debian.org/logos/ I don't know how GNU expect to protect the GNU identity and icons from abuse - maybe the nature of the FSF itself is sufficient but it does seem unfair to exclude other organisations who simply want a word and a picture to identify that organisation to the wider public. Trademarks are awkward things for free software - an intrinsically commercial concept, trademarks still seem necessary when a project or company has taken a lot of time and effort to build a reputation. Reputation cannot be shared and the means of retaining your reputation - at least the means deemed to be understood by the public - mean excluding some people from having the right to pretend to be you. It is a part of the identity of the organisation that cryptography is unable to protect - any verification would have to include verifying the hostname of the webserver displaying the logo and icon against (say) DNS records or similar, making it difficult to have more than one machine serving a particular site. It's a minor problem that has no obvious solution. Human nature being what it is, we cannot simply trust everyone to respect the unwritten rules so, for now, trademarks are necessary but awkward. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpvM3si3r0kW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html