Todd Walton wrote: > On 9/5/05, Tracy R Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Old news. This originally started back in 2000. >> >>http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050816092029989#c352484 > >
> That link didn't indicate anything (that I saw) about this starting in 2000. Linus made a post explaining that all of this was coming and why back in 2000 when he trademarked it. > I read the article at the top of the page you linked to. The author > seemed to be saying, "It's not a conspiracy, the reasons are well > known, and people do this kind of thing all the time." It was not > very convincing. I don't see what's wrong with treating the word > "Linux" like any other computing term. "Kernel" is not trademarked! If Linus doesn't trademark Linux then someone else will. Someone like perhaps Microsoft. Then they can prevent everyone else from using that name and we have to change the name of our favorite OS. > People use "kernel" in very different ways! But if they use it in the > wrong way, nobody is for the worse. What about people who patch > Linux? When does it become not-Linux? What about distros? If I want > to start my own very-small, special-purpose Linux distro, do I have to > pay $200 if I want to call my project "Todd's Linux"? Did you even read the above explanation? This has all been covered. > This seems kind of dumb to me. Linux (R) doesn't need protecting. Linux definitely does need protecting. -- Tracy R Reed http://ultraviolet.org -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
