Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Red Hat Software Businesses

Universities Dispute with Red Hat over 'Fedora' 500

Posted by michael from the red-hat-hoist-by-own-fedora dept.
Carl Lagoze points out that a pre-existing software project is already using the Fedora name, dating back to 1998. They're unhappy with Red Hat's claim to the name, and have objected.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Universities Dispute with Red Hat over 'Fedora' More

Universities Dispute with Red Hat over 'Fedora'

Comments Filter:

  • Pot, meet kettle. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fo0bar ( 261207 ) * on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:31PM (#7521749)
    Perhaps Warren Togami [fedora.us] should take exeption to Virginia/Cornell using the Fedora name 5 months after the (now Red Hat) Fedora project was started.

    Founded December 2002 by University of Hawaii Computer Science student Warren Togami, the previous Fedora Linux Project is an international team of volunteer software developers united for the development of high quality 3rd party RPM packages for the Red Hat Linux platform.

    • Re:Pot, meet kettle. (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Jebus, it's like the Firebird debacle all over again.

      "You stole our name"

      "No, you stole it from someone else."

      "Umm, we did? No we didn't! We didn't know about it, so it's ours - we don't care if someone had it first. You stole it from us!"

    • Re:Pot, meet kettle. (Score:3, Informative)

      by fo0bar ( 261207 )
      Sorry, I should probably elaborate. From reading the university Fedora website, it appears that while work on the project itself was around since 1998, it wasn't actually released to the public under the Fedora name until May 2003.

      Meanwhile, Fedora Linux started in December 2002 as a collection of 3rd party RPMs

      • Re:Pot, meet kettle. (Score:3, Informative)

        by ahillen ( 45680 )
        From reading the university Fedora website, it appears that while work on the project itself was around since 1998, it wasn't actually released to the public under the Fedora name until May 2003.

        Hmm, I think they are only saying that they released version 1.0 to the public in May 2003. To quote their website:

        " There is substantial evidence for prior use of the name Fedora? by the Cornell and Virginia teams starting in 1998. This includes published papers, web sites, software releases, and public presen
    • Maybe you should re-read The Fedora(TM) Project's press release... [fedora.info]

      There is substantial evidence for prior use of the name Fedora(TM) by the Cornell and Virginia teams starting in 1998. This includes published papers, web sites, software releases, and public presentations.
      • Maybe you should re-read The Fedora(TM) Project's press release...
        There is substantial evidence for prior use of the name Fedora(TM) by the Cornell and Virginia teams starting in 1998. This includes published papers, web sites, software releases, and public presentations.

        Note to self: never try to first post again. Stupid fo0bar. Anyways, yeah, they've been using the Fedora name since 1998, but besides being "something on a computer", the two projects have almost nothing in common. After all, we have

    • I still think that Red Hat might not be able to defend their exclusive use of the trademark, as the Virginia/Cornell project started using the name before the trademark application.
    • No, if you read the press release you will see that they were releasing software and documentation as far back as 1998. The May 2003 date is simply when they reached version 1.0.
    • I'm always shocked at these types of naming farces. It is so easy to run a search on any name and determine prior uses. Besides a search engine, other good sources of prior uses of name include any online yellow pages, whois, and the USPTO Trademark Search [uspto.gov]. A bit of searching before deciding on a name can help prevent these types of trademark infringement problems.

      • All the good names are taken (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Kombat ( 93720 ) <kevin@swanweddingphotography.com> on Thursday November 20, 2003 @04:52PM (#7523103)
        The problem is that all the best names are already taken. Some are taken by real companies selling real products, others are taken by obscure one-man-shop programmers. RedHat wanted a cool name for this new product, and realized they'd have better odds picking a fight with a ragtag bunch of students than with a real company with real resources to invest in a legal battle.

        I think they're right. Seriously, all the best names are taken. If you're going to create a new product, the best you can hope for is that whoever has already created a product with that name didn't really do much with it, and will be willing to sell you the name (or not put up a fight when you take it anyway).

  • Heavens to murgatroid!!! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by eyegor ( 148503 ) * on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:31PM (#7521750)
    Did Darl McBride take over Red Hat when we weren't looking?
    "Fedora is now a trademark of Red Hat, Inc. Red Hat will defend this trademark in order to protect the integrity of The Fedora Project"
    Looks like Red Hat needs to find another name.

    • Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Fulcrum of Evil ( 560260 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:37PM (#7521852)

      Or maybe they need to realize that it's okay to have a Fedora Linux project and a Fedora (something else) project. Trademarks are only valid for a limited set of things - you can't TM a word and claim domain over all uses of it.

      • Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! (Score:5, Informative)

        by Theatetus ( 521747 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:46PM (#7521979) Journal
        you can't TM a word and claim domain over all uses of it.

        Actually you can, if it's a made-up word. Now that Phillip-Morris is "Altria" or whatever, I can't go and start "Altria Lumber Concern" even though lumber isn't related to their cancer creation service.

        But, since neither party made up the word "Fedora", you may have a point. However, the "field" is generally recognized to be rather broad, for example, "software". If some company decided to call its telephony software suite "Nero Burning ROM", Ahead could still stop them even though telephony and CD recording are ostensibly different fields.

        • However, the "field" is generally recognized to be rather broad, for example, "software".

          Isn't there at least a division between application software and OS software?

          If some company decided to call its telephony software suite "Nero Burning ROM", Ahead could still stop them

          That falls into your 'made up' exemption - the telephony company could name its software Nero without any problems, but Nero Burning ROM is a coined phrase.

        • However, the "field" is generally recognized to be rather broad, for example, "software".

          On the other hand, Apple got away with using "OS 9" despite the existence of an earlier "OS-9" on the grounds that no one could confuse an embedded product with a desktop OS.

          Realistically, it seems like there's a large gray area and the more prominent and deeper-pocketed combatant usually wins.

      • Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! (Score:4, Informative)

        by nodwick ( 716348 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @03:27PM (#7522421)
        Or maybe they need to realize that it's okay to have a Fedora Linux project and a Fedora (something else) project.
        Actually, as I read the article, U Virginia and Cornell are objecting precisely because Red Hat is asserting that it's not ok to have a Fedora Linux and a Fedora [other software] project. From the article:
        Red Hat's assertion of trademark includes restrictive guidelines on the use of the Fedora name.
        This is understandably a concern for the "other" Fedora if Red Hat is going to make them change their name. If you check RH's Trademark Info [redhat.com] page, they do seem to have some cause for concern that RH is going to clamp down on them:
        Except as provided herein, you may not use "Fedora" or any confusingly similar mark as a trademark for your product, or use "Fedora" in any other manner that might cause confusion in the marketplace, including in advertising, on auction sites, or on software or hardware. Any party wishing to use the Fedora(TM) mark may do so as long as they meet two conditions:

        (1) They must only use the Fedora(TM) mark in association with the original Fedora(TM) code found on the Fedora Project website (see http://fedora.redhat.com/) without modification;

        (2) If they charge a fee for the CD-ROM or other media on which they deliver the Fedora(TM) code, they warranty the media on which the Fedora(TM) code is delivered, thus ensuring that the recipient receives a usable copy.

        Emphasis added is mine. The wording of the legalese seems to imply that the next step for Red Hat is to clamp down on anyone else trying to publicize other software (or even non-software products) also named Fedora, even if it isn't related to Linux. Whether that's legally defensible is arguable, but the intent to try appears to be there.

      • Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! (Score:5, Funny)

        by jackbox ( 398140 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @03:51PM (#7522629)
        Trademarks are only valid for a limited set of things - you can't TM a word and claim domain over all uses of it.

        That's right. Surely, anyone who successfully gained Access to trademark rights on common terms would have quite a Project ahead of them! They would need lawyers that Excel at trademark law to defend them. I doubt that any litigator could ever have the last Word on this issue; the Outlook would not be good. But a savvy legal Explorer could open a lot of Windows into to what goes on behind such strategies.

  • Name change (Score:3, Funny)

    by penguinrenegade ( 651460 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:31PM (#7521757)
    Then apparently Fedora needs to change hats...

  • how about the hat.... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by caffeinex36 ( 608768 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:34PM (#7521800)
    seems www.fedora.info is using a hat that looks similar to redhats doesnt it? im sure everyone will throw stones for a while...till the glass house falls down.

    • Re:how about the hat.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Tenareth ( 17013 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:37PM (#7521857) Homepage

      A Trademark needs to be exact, It's a Fedora (Generic) and it's not red, and it's not pointing the right direction.

      Just ask Rob about the IBM Logo, IBM said that since it wasn't the proper ratio it wasn't a valid Logo. In an old job we got to co-brand with IBM, and the dimensions were defined down to the width of the spaces and blue in the lettering.

    • Fedora IS a hat (Score:5, Informative)

      by macdaddy ( 38372 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @03:05PM (#7522182) Homepage Journal
      Fedora [reference.com] is a type of hat.

      fedora ( P ) Pronunciation Key (f-dor, -dr)

      n.

      A soft felt hat with a fairly low crown creased lengthwise and a brim that can be turned up or down.

      That's probably why Cornell's Fedora Project uses a hat as a logo and why Redhat chose Fedora as a project name.

      • That's probably why Cornell's Fedora Project uses a hat as a logo and why Redhat chose Fedora as a project name.

        I've been paying less attention to linux over the past few months since I've moved on to OS X, but I believe that RedHat didn't exactly choose the Fedora name. Warren had been using fedora for his apt-rpm repository for a while and when RedHat merged their desktop distro with his stuff, they simply kept the name. It doesn't really change anything, but I'm not really familiar with trademark law.

    • > seems www.fedora.info is using a hat that looks similar to redhats doesnt it?

      Well yeah, they're both fedoras. If they were both using bowlers or stetsons, those would probably look similar too.

  • Amazon, etc. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Should we point out to the university that Amazon is the name of a rainforest, and that the online store should change their name?

    There are many instances where names overlap in different products, companies and places. It's just something that you have to accept and deal with in a free market economy, and especially OSS.

  • Gentoo (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:34PM (#7521804)
    Kind of like http://freshmeat.net/projects/gentoo/ and http://www.gentoo.org.

    • Re:Gentoo (Score:5, Informative)

      by Neon Spiral Injector ( 21234 ) * on Thursday November 20, 2003 @03:05PM (#7522185)
      From the bottom of the (file manager) project's home page [obsession.se]:

      Gentoo the Linux distribution has nothing to do with gentoo the file manager, except the latter runs on the former. I actually used the name first of the two, way back in September 1998. I've been in touch with the Gentoo folks, and we're cool.

  • Alternate Names (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Vengie ( 533896 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:35PM (#7521826)
    Blue BabyBonnet Linux
    Raspberry Beret Linux
    I mean really. The attempt at "fedora" from "red hat" was cute.....but it isn't exactly necessary.....
    Pink Sunglasses Linux.....
    Green Visor Linux
    fedora is a "cute" inside joke that most people won't even get. [how many PHB's or joe-sixpacks or even college students do you really expect know what the hell a Fedora is anyway]
    -b
    • a fedora is easy. indiana jones wore one!
    • fedora is a "cute" inside joke that most people won't even get. [how many PHB's or joe-sixpacks or even college students do you really expect know what the hell a Fedora is anyway]

      Plenty [google.com]. I actually think that geeks would have a harder time knowing what a Fedora is than Joe Sixpack. Joe Sixpack watched all the Chicago Gangster movies growing up. Geeks watched Sci-Fi.

      Case and point: My wife (who's originally from Russia!) knew what a Fedora was when I asked her. I had to Google to figure it out.
    • its a hat. what's the big deal? that, and its the same type of hat that's been redhat's logo since day one. go to their merchandise site. They've been selling the "RedHat Fedora" for years, produced by the New York Hat Company. where is the joke?

  • In Related News... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Lazarus_Bitmap ( 593726 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:36PM (#7521840)

    Matt Drudge has issued an objection, as he has a program that dates back to '98; a content management tool that auto-publishes sexual innuendo the second it is uttered by obscure, unnamed sources.

  • Pretty boneheaded move on Red Hat's part (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:37PM (#7521855)
    A simple Google search on "Fedora" shows the project as the third result (behind two Fedora Linux results.) If you were going to name your project something, don't you think you'd at least take the ten seconds it takes to do a Google search and make sure you're not taking an already-used name? Fedora (Flexible Extensible Digital Object Repository Architecture) is even trademarked, for crying out loud.

    Somebody at Red Hat needs their ass kicked over this, methinks.

  • mirror (Score:2, Informative)

    by millette ( 56354 )
    In case it gets slashdotted: mirror [waglo.com]
    • Ok, so it didn't get slashdotted. Good for them :) When I saw the page the first time, it was a little slow, but it picked up steam now. Anyway, my mirror is smaller and doesn't have weird ms tags in its html. It also doesn't cause tidy to segfault...

  • What took them so long? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by brundlefly ( 189430 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:39PM (#7521881)

    I have no dispute with the university's prior claim.

    But I have to wonder if they have been living under a rock... what took them so long to get vocal about this? RH's Fedora has been on the public radar for a long, long time now.

    • They may have just gone public, but their site says "The Cornell and Virginia teams have taken a number of steps to try to work with Red Hat regarding use of the name Fedora(TM). At this date, Red Hat has refused our request...." My guess is that they started waving their hands as soon as it became public knowledge, but as usual it took a while for everybody to hear about everybody else -- by which time it's a little late to get the toothpaste back into the tube.
    • RedHat filed for the trademark two months ago. September 5, 2003 to be exact.

  • Firebird! (Score:5, Funny)

    by silicongodcom ( 241132 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:39PM (#7521883)
    Just call it Firebird!

  • Trademarks... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by badasscat ( 563442 ) <basscadet75@@@yahoo...com> on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:39PM (#7521890)
    IANAL, but AFAIK you cannot trademark common English words. The example I've always seen is that you cannot trademark the word "orange", but you could trademark a unique phrase containing the word "orange". The Fedora Project homepage linked from the parent article seems to have the *word* "Fedora" trademarked, which I can't see would be possible (and in fact, it's not listed as a registered trademark, just a trademark - so there's no government sanctioning of their trademark).

    I'm not sure I blame Red Hat for this one. A fedora is a fedora, just like an orange is an orange. You can't trademark it. If two companies are using the same word for their software projects, too bad. Protest those who put the word in the Oxford dictionary, maybe... but I don't think there's any real legal claim here.

    And I'll close by reminding you again, IANAL.

    • Re:Trademarks... (Score:5, Informative)

      by javatips ( 66293 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:45PM (#7521966) Homepage
      You can trademark common english words if the product/service the trademark will be put on is not related to the meaning of the word.

      I can trademark "Truck" for some software product but not for a vehicule.
      • You can trademark common english words if the product/service the trademark will be put on is not related to the meaning of the word.

        All true and correct. But this doesn't explain how "Windows" really justifies its trademark. A "window" in computer parlance means what we all think it is - a program in a box on a screen. Thus, "X-Windows". How can it be claimed that a "Window" (and thus "Windows") is not a generic term?

        Watching the Lindows trademark suit may be *very* interesting, if Lindows goes on the

    • IANAL, but AFAIK you cannot trademark common English words.

      IANAL either -- but if you can trademark Red Hat, Yahoo!, Fox, etc -- or the name of any company/product that's an English word or phrase, how does Fedora not apply?

      What the law (AFAIK) comes down to is really to protect your name, which differtiates your product or company from competitors. I can't go start another TV Network called Fox. Similarly, I can't open a courier services and offer "UPS Brown" service. These are protected names...

    • I can't comment about the US with any authority, but it sounds like it's similar to New Zealand (where I am).

      Here, you can't prevent people from using common words but you can still trademark them as trade names. This was in the local news several years ago when someone managed to trademark the word "Millenium".

      It didn't mean that nobody could use the word Millenium. It didn't even mean that people couldn't use it for routine commercial use. (eg. "There will be a huge sale to mark the new millen

    • There are TONS of trademarks issued for words that are in the English language. Look at Apple, Sun, and Windows for examples. Hell, even 'Ford' is an English word.
    • It, like IANAL is an Acronym.

      "Flexible Extensible Digital Object Repository Architecture" = FEDORA.

      Decapped, it becomes "Fedora".

      And there you have it, "Fedora" is trademarkable.

      Trademarkable is not an English language word.

    • AFAIK you cannot trademark common English words. The example I've always seen is that you cannot trademark the word "orange", but you could trademark a unique phrase containing the word "orange".

      IANAL either, but I believe that the way trademarks work (in the U.S. anyway) is that you can trademark common words, within the context of a particular domain. For example, within the context of computers, only a certain company can call their products "Apple" (a common English word), but now that that company

    • Yes, you can trademark common english words, but it can not describe what you do or sell. Thus you have Apple Computers and Apple Records, but no fruit company called Apple - though you could possibly use "Pacific Apple Company". Another example, you couldn't call your internet company "ISP" since it is an industry term, but you could call your fruit company that.

      IANAL.

  • New name (Score:2, Funny)

    by Bazman ( 4849 )
    Since all the geeks round here refer to 'Head Rat Linux' anyway, they should rename it Deaf Aura just to keep one step ahead...

  • New Fedora Name Poll (Score:5, Funny)

    by gekkotron ( 641131 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:41PM (#7521909) Journal
    1. Bowler
    2. Beanie
    3. Tinfoil
    4. Fez
    5. Toque
    6. Skullcap
    7. Helmet
    8. Cowboy Neal's AssHat
  • Well, can't use "Pink Tie" if I recall correctly, as that's what cheapbytes used to sell what would have otherwise been a Red Hat distro.

    How about calling it "The Distro Formerly Known as Red Hat Linux for Consumers?" -- or "|" for short? Instant recognition from avid *nix users...yet geeky enough to separate the "in-crowd" from the strictly-windows folks.

    The ironic thing about this is that Fedora is supposed to be the community edition of Red Hat Linux (so the PR wants us to imagine as opposed to bluntl

  • USPTO Link (Score:5, Informative)

    by Gunfighter ( 1944 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:46PM (#7521974)
    Click here [uspto.gov] to view the status of Red Hat's Trademark filing.

  • How about Phoenix? (Score:3, Funny)

    by el-spectre ( 668104 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:47PM (#7522001) Journal
    Just a thought...

  • Cowboy Linux! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by moronikos ( 595352 )
    The ought to name it after the cowboy hat, our President (in the U.S.), and after Cowboy Neal!
  • to squash your competition, simply get a short, 2 line story posted to slashdot. let geeks around the world do the dirty work for you for free. no more stock options for lawyers!
  • according to these folks they farted around for 5 years and did barely anything. redhat announces a merger with the existing fedora linux project (existing since november 2002) and there's a release in just a month or so. and while redhat has trademarked the name they haven't threatened this project.

    and now they want to bitch about the name?

  • fedora.info lies (Score:5, Informative)

    by oldstrat ( 87076 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @02:56PM (#7522086) Journal

    A search at the US patent and trademark office lists 4 registered trademarks with the word fedora in them.

    . 73467748 Feb 28 1984 Fedora Cafe and Bar
    . 78296509 Sept 5 2003 Red Hat
    . 78268874 June 30 2003 cosmetics
    . 78312293 Oct 10 2003 Chemical Data Software

    The fedora.info site of the complaining fedora project is using a tm symbol next to thier name on the site, but they have not registered it with the US trademark office.

    It is not exclusively trademarked for software by fedora.info.
    This could be forgiven of a small independent group, but this group is a co sponsored project, part of Cornell University and University of Virginia both of which I am sure have strict policies about things like Trademark, copyright and patents. And both have the legal staff to handle it.

    Sorry but they won't get any sympathy from me, and no support from the law.

    Trademark is not like copyright law, you must register to get exclusive control for a product in a market.
    • The project's complaint would seem to be that Red Hat has made a clear statement that Red Hat will vigorously defend ALL of their trademarks. The discussion would then seem to be self defense on the project's part: "Hey, we have been using that for 5 years, are you going to leave us alone? Hello? Bueller?"

      Red Hat is stuck, they can't let one trademark infringement slide if they intend to keep the trademark pure. I agree with a previous poster, Red Hat deserves a kick in the pants for not doing a simple goo
    • Trademark is not like copyright law, you must register to get exclusive control for a product in a market.

      Um, bull. IANAL but I worked for a year as a legal assistant specializing in trademarks. Trademark is established under common law by use of the mark. A trademark filing is just an assertion that the mark is already in use by you - you can't even file before it's actually being used in connection with the sale of goods or services. Filing the trademark is purely a convenience, a way of establishing fu

    • Re:fedora.info lies (Score:5, Interesting)

      by GammaTau ( 636807 ) <jni@iki.fi> on Thursday November 20, 2003 @03:23PM (#7522383) Homepage Journal

      The fedora.info site of the complaining fedora project is using a tm symbol next to thier name on the site, but they have not registered it with the US trademark office.

      As far as I know, there are basically two ways of getting a trademark: the first is by registering and the second is by using something commercially long enough for it to become clearly associated with a company or a product. The first kind of trademark is denoted by having an R inside a circle whereas the second is denoted with the small tm symbol.

      In other words:
      (R) = Trademark through registration
      tm = Trademark through established use

      Using the tm symbol in the press release is consistent with their position because they're saying that they have become associated with the name 'Fedora'. They can have a trademark claim to the word even when they haven't registered it.

      Disclaimer: IANAL etc.

  • Wait, Taco! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Call Me Black Cloud ( 616282 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @03:10PM (#7522234)
    Before you send off those interview questions [slashdot.org] to Matthew Szulik, I think there may be one or two new ones that would be appropriate...
  • The REAL question I'm wondering is: Did Red Hat seriously not take five minutes to look into any prior instances of the name "Fedora" in similar projects (any search engine would turn this up), or did Red Hat decide they were big and powerful enough that they could pretend they were Microsoft or Apple and just throw their legal and financial weight around and simply steal the name from the "little guy"?

  • Why not use my name? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Bowie J. Poag ( 16898 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @05:08PM (#7523267) Homepage


    Being strong, reliable, and slightly bloated myself, I feel my name would be a wonderful alternative to "Fedora".

    Just thinking ahead. ;)

    (By the way, stop sucking, Red Hat. Seriously.)

  • Fedora prior art? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Quixadhal ( 45024 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @05:34PM (#7523504) Homepage Journal
    Indiana Jones is reportedly suing Red Hat, Inc. for casting his trademark headgear in a bad light. Doctor Jones's lawyer says that the term "Red Hat" could also be subject to trademark, as one of Indy's seldom worn spring outfits featured a red fedora.

    In other news, Darl McBride was seen running amuck in the downtown area, stealing any hats he could get his hands on while screaming 'They're ALL MINE! MINE!!!'

  • I can't think of any... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lostchicken ( 226656 ) on Thursday November 20, 2003 @06:29PM (#7523950)
    When have trademark cases actually been won by the big guys? When has a major company had to rename a product, after it had shipped? I'm sure there are examples, but I can't think of any.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close