Good then you won't do that and you have nothing to be concerned about. Even if you were to leave in a mark that Canonical considered infringing, all you would have to do is correct that when it's discovered.
No, I have a great deal to be concerned about. Canonical appear to reserve the right to sue me for copyright infringement if any of their trademarks are present in the packages that I distribute, even if the use of those trademarks is non-infringing. Since Canonical are copyright holders, I'd have no recourse.
You won't get that because there are still things people can do, without those packages installed, that would violate trademark and/or copyright
We're limiting ourselves to the software itself here - obviously I can misuse Canonical's trademarks in other ways, but I can do that without using any of Canonical's software and so be entirely outside the scope of the policy we're discussing. If Canonical will agree that removing these packages means that the software distribution in itself will not be a trademark infringement, that's sufficient.
As I said before, if Canonical accepts this in principle, I'll do the work.
Nor can you just replace the Red Hat logos with your own in a RHEL DVD and redistribute that.
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Comparing to Fedora / Comparing to Red Hat
Date: 2015-11-23 10:41 pm (UTC)No, I have a great deal to be concerned about. Canonical appear to reserve the right to sue me for copyright infringement if any of their trademarks are present in the packages that I distribute, even if the use of those trademarks is non-infringing. Since Canonical are copyright holders, I'd have no recourse.
We're limiting ourselves to the software itself here - obviously I can misuse Canonical's trademarks in other ways, but I can do that without using any of Canonical's software and so be entirely outside the scope of the policy we're discussing. If Canonical will agree that removing these packages means that the software distribution in itself will not be a trademark infringement, that's sufficient.
As I said before, if Canonical accepts this in principle, I'll do the work.
Sure you can.