On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:49:51AM -0800, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Jos Vos j...@xos.nl wrote:
This sounds as if this is bad: are you a communist?
This sounds as if you have reading problems. Are you an illiterate?
[...] (Always remember that
Yasha Karant ykar...@csusb.edu writes:
How exactly does a for-profit corporation buy an endeavor such as
CentOS?
By hiring the key, primary developers, I would imagine.
Could RH buy SL from Fermilab/CERN?
RH can try (and has succeeded once in the past) to hire SL developers
away.
http://www.centos.org/legal/trademarks/
The CentOS Marks are trademarks of Red Hat, Inc.
I find it puzzling that official announcements say nothing
about CentOS trademarks, copyrights, etc being transferred
to Red Hat - as that web page seems to imply.
FWIW, the centos.org domain and the
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:45:01AM -0800, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
RedHat is a company. Companies exist for the sole purpose of making
money. Every action by any company -- literally every single action,
ever -- is motivated by that goal.
That the 1914 Adam Smith and Carl Marx brand of
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Konstantin Olchanski
olcha...@triumf.ca wrote:
I find it puzzling that official announcements say nothing
about CentOS trademarks, copyrights, etc being transferred
to Red Hat - as that web page seems to imply.
It is also mentioned in Red Hat's FAQ:
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Jos Vos j...@xos.nl wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:49:51AM -0800, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
[...] (Always remember that companies,
like politicians, do not make statements to communicate information.
They make statements to achieve a desired result. Their
-- Forwarded message --
From: Patrick J. LoPresti lopre...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:29 PM
Subject: Re: RedHat CentOS acquisition: stating the obvious
To: Jos Vos j...@xos.nl
Cc: scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov
OK, this is going to be way off topic...
(more off
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:45:01AM -0800, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
RedHat is a company. Companies exist for the sole purpose of making
money. Every action by any company -- literally every single action,
ever -- is motivated by that goal.
This sounds as if this is bad: are you a communist?
Remember, every corporation has a legal responsibility to its shareholders
which usually looks like (and I quote from
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0119-04.htm because the author has
experience as a corporate securities attorney and I am a physical
scientist with no legal training),
: RedHat CentOS acquisition: stating the obvious
RedHat is a company. Companies exist for the sole purpose of making
money. Every action by any company -- literally every single action,
ever -- is motivated by that goal.
The question you should be asking is: How does Red Hat believe this
move
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 2:06 PM, David Sommerseth da...@sommerseths.net wrote:
On 15/01/14 19:49, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
- Red Hat (the company) considers Oracle (the company) one of their
top two competitors.
- Red Hat considers CentOS a competitor.
- Red Hat believes acquiring
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 03:27:18PM -0800, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
*Of course* Red Hat has acquired CentOS. SIngh et. al. are now
full-time RedHat employees (proof left as exercise for the reader).
The relationship could hardly be more clear.
Red Hat does not own CentOS, either the product
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 3:34 PM, John R. Dennison j...@gerdesas.com wrote:
Red Hat does not own CentOS, either the product nor the project. Red
Hat does not own the various marks.
Wrong.
http://www.centos.org/legal/trademarks/
The CentOS Marks are trademarks of Red Hat, Inc.
- Pat
At the risk of repeating myself... I refer you to Red Hat's 10-K
filing:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1087423/000119312513173724/d484576d10k.htm#tx484576_1
See the Competition section on pages 12-14. Search for Oracle and
CentOS.
So when I say, Red Hat considers CentOS a
On 01/15/2014 03:37 PM, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 3:34 PM, John R. Dennison j...@gerdesas.com wrote:
Red Hat does not own CentOS, either the product nor the project. Red
Hat does not own the various marks.
Wrong.
http://www.centos.org/legal/trademarks/
The CentOS
On 2014/01/15 15:27, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 2:06 PM, David Sommerseth da...@sommerseths.net wrote:
On 15/01/14 19:49, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
- Red Hat (the company) considers Oracle (the company) one of their
top two competitors.
- Red Hat considers CentOS a
On 01/15/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
Singh does not mention this detail in his own announcement
(http://www.karan.org/blog/2014/01/07/as-a-community-for-the-community/).
I guess it must have slipped his mind? Or maybe he figured nobody
would consider it relevant? Ha ha ha.
so,
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote:
On 01/15/2014 11:27 PM, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
so, rather than looking at an opinion blog, why dont you go read the
actual announcement ? see if that mentions this little detail...
Do you mean Red Hat's
RedHat is a company. Companies exist for the sole purpose of making
money. Every action by any company -- literally every single action,
ever -- is motivated by that goal.
The question you should be asking is: How does Red Hat believe this
move is going to make them money?
Those were statements
a LinkedIn profile:
http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=2367003trk=tab_pro
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:45:01 -0800
Subject: RedHat CentOS acquisition: stating the obvious
From: lopre...@gmail.com
To: scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov
RedHat is a company. Companies exist for the sole
Patrick,
Why do you think oracle's spinoff is their major competition?
On Jan 14, 2014 12:47 PM, Patrick J. LoPresti lopre...@gmail.com wrote:
RedHat is a company. Companies exist for the sole purpose of making
money. Every action by any company -- literally every single action,
ever -- is
What spinoff do you mean? Did I miss something?
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/co?s=RHT+Competitors
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Linux
I suppose you could argue that Oracle comes behind Microsoft and
Novell on the list of Red Hat competitors (I wonder how Red Hat looks
at it?), but I do not
-
From: Patrick J. LoPresti lopre...@gmail.com
To: scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 12:45:01 PM
Subject: RedHat CentOS acquisition: stating the obvious
RedHat is a company. Companies exist for the sole purpose of making
money. Every action by any company
-us...@listserv.fnal.gov
[owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov] on behalf of John Lauro
[john.la...@covenanteyes.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 4:59 PM
To: Patrick J. LoPresti
Cc: scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov
Subject: Re: RedHat CentOS acquisition: stating the obvious
Your
So I decided to check the Competition section of Red Hat's annual
SEC regulatory filing (10-K):
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1087423/000119312513173724/d484576d10k.htm#tx484576_1
(see pages 11-13)
Oracle and Microsoft are each mentioned seven times in this
section, far more than any
uot; lopre...@gmail.com
To: scientific-linux-users@fnal.gov
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 12:45:01 PM
Subject: RedHat CentOS acquisition: stating the obvious
RedHat is a company. Companies exist for the sole purpose of making
money. Every action by any company -- literally every single act
Very interesting points of view. I don't want to bite off more than one can
chew but...in light of what has been written...which interpretation could
we give (as SL users) to the very recent setup of a Fedora Server (Working
Group) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server given the existing
27 matches
Mail list logo
