How to kill a community
I was looking at the inquirer (which is unusual for me) and saw this article that talks about an organization called "Linux Australia" that has been commissioned to get companies that are using the Linux name to pay AU$5000 to continue using it.
Huh? It gets worse - Linux Australia is a "community organization".
And article uses Linus Torvalds' name - saying that he is endorsing the move.
The really interesting thing is the reason behind the move which was stated as "to protect the quality of products that go out under that brand".
It seems to me that the "linux brand" is becoming less free all the time, and starting to look more and more like a commercial entity of some sort.
Having a "community organization" doing this sort of work in the community must be really disheartening for the linux community members.
Comments
Anonymous
August 21, 2005
FUD!Anonymous
August 21, 2005
Instead of spreading FUD, please check what Linus Torvalds himself has to say about the whole thing -
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=112458521702385&w=2
The whole thread is quite interesting. Take a look ! (Of course I am hoping you had a good intent when you wrote this FUD ;)Anonymous
August 21, 2005
My understanding is that they're trying to protect the "Linux" trademark, not "Linux" software. I'm sure if the offending companies were to take the name "Linux" out of their products, they wouldn't be required to pay.
That's the problem with trademarks - unless you actively protect them (by issuing cease&desist notices to people using it without your concent), they become useless.
I guess issuing a $5,000 bill is not a very polite way of going about it, however.Anonymous
August 21, 2005
I didn't dig on this at all. Nor was my intention to single out Linus and say hes a bad guy - thats clearly not the case.
My first point (and still remains) was that a community organization carrying out this sort of work in the community doesn't leave a nice taste in my mouth.
If Microsoft asked me as an MVP (when I was one) to go and sort out it's legal problems, I wouldn't have been interested and it would have made me less interested in working with them in the future. [p]My other point about the Linux brand becoming more commercial also still stands.
Trademarks (for whatever reasons) are about protecting intellectual property. Granted the GPL prevents much of the software from becoming commercial, but the world of Linux doesn't have the same "roaming free" feel to it that it used to. And it's inevitable that it will continue to be more commercial as more people try to make money off it's momentum.
And no - I dont have any vendetta against Linux. I used to be a proponent of it (http://groups.google.com/group/nz.comp/browse_frm/thread/509481c5f7808633/b169323dfbd809c5?tvc=1&hl=en#b169323dfbd809c5). :-)Anonymous
August 21, 2005
The comment has been removedAnonymous
August 22, 2005
The comment has been removedAnonymous
August 22, 2005
This is not gutter politics nor is this journalism. Its a blog. A place where I put down things that I'm thinking about and that I want to share. Beat up the reporters who did the initial story if you want to hang someone for lack of facts. I'm consuming limited amounts of data - thats all.
My point was (and still is) that a community should not be divided against itself. A community organization performing legal action inside the community seems divided to me.Anonymous
August 22, 2005
The comment has been removedAnonymous
August 22, 2005
I'm closing comments on this post.Anonymous
June 07, 2009
PingBack from http://weakbladder.info/story.php?id=7002Anonymous
June 08, 2009
PingBack from http://cellulitecreamsite.info/story.php?id=11278