[Centos] Red Hat Legal Targets www.centos.org website content

Mon Feb 14 14:53:23 UTC 2005
Dag Wieers <dag at wieers.com>

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote:

> I think RH's going a bit overboard, as there really was no confusion as to
> whether or not RH was supporting CentOS.

Well, I would not necessarily draw that conclusion. People not accustomed 
with terminology or the Internet can make wrong assumptions. I regularly 
get a mail asking how they can update their RHEL distribution using my 
repositories (when they specifically mean updates).

I could add a big red banner on top that I do not offer updates, and most 
likely I would still get mails. (often in  poor english :))

However, can I be held responsible if some people lack background or are 
being confused. And how many red banners would clear me from the 
responsibility ?

That's why I think an official legal complaint should indicate what clear 
actions they want. Maybe a few specific examples that they think indicate 
the problem. They should be required to specifically tell what the problem 
is instead of some vague legal terms that I will never know whether I 
comply with or not.

Maybe bringing in the lawyers as a first step is not such a good idea. But 
the legal climate (especially in the US) probably requires such action 
(and is maybe less intimidating in the US than preceived in Europe).

It would be nice to know exactly what is required in this situation. The 
secrecy is causing FUD about the whole subject and is damaging Red Hat's 
reputation indirectly too.

--   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]