News at nine: Canonical manages another PR nightmare

[kubicle]

https://micahflee.com/2013/11/canoni...acy-decisions/

They're getting good at it, too, a lot of entertainment for the blogosphere.

[oshunluvr]

Wow, Jono really stepped in it this time.

As if the other crap - like Mir - wasn't enough, now we have another reason to change bases.

[perspectoff]

What has Ubuntu got that Debian hasn't got?

For surveyed websites there are more Debian servers (32.7% of Linux servers) than Ubuntu servers (26.3%)...

(see http://w3techs.com/technologies/hist...tails/os-linux )

Also, Debian has a strong KDE effort:

https://wiki.debian.org/KDE

I do note, however, that the Mint KDE version remains with Ubuntu and not with Debian...

[dibl]

What has Ubuntu got that Debian hasn't got?

As a person who ran Kubuntu for about 3 years, then switched to Debian, I think I have some perspective, perspectoff.

The good -- the all-graphical Kubuntu package management utilities are seen as a great advantage by some. I think Debian stable comes pretty close to equalling Kubuntu in that regard, but I run sid (siduction) and we have to revert to dpkg and apt to manage packages.

More good -- the jockey-kde utility for managing non-free drivers is seen by many as a great advantage. AFAIK, Debian doesn't have anything like that, since they follow DFSG.

The bad -- for anyone who cares to keep current with their productivity software, there is a *%^#*! version upgrade facing them every six months with *buntu. With Debian stable, it is about every 2 years for recent versions. For siduction or aptosid, version upgrades are NEVER (or every 6 hours -- depends on how you look at it, I guess). Of course the *buntu PPA system mitigates this issue, for awhile, but eventually the old kernel and other OS pieces will become problematical as the newer software comes looking for current support structures in the OS.

The other bad -- I can't quantify this, but I'm seeing *buntu dropping support for older hardware when there are still users wanting to use SiS GPUs, older Nvidia GPUs, etc.

However, of course some of these issues are only relevant for desktop productivity, and not necessarily for servers.

Also, Debian has a strong KDE effort:

https://wiki.debian.org/KDE

Yes, they do indeed. And it is not unusual to see KDE bugs discovered and fixed as a result of early use by siduction and aptosid users -- there are kde-next and kde-experimental repositories where we get the new packages to play with.

So yes, KDE desktop productivity is perfectly possible on a Debian OS.

[NickStone]

interesting reading but the letter from a lawyer advising Canonical that their letter is in breach of the 1st amendment clearly does not know international law. Canonical is based in Britain (the UK) and therefore the 1st Amendment means nothing in Britain. In Britain, we don't have any such laws as freedom of speech or freedom of using trademarked logos. If a British company finds out that your using a trademark belonging to them then they are allowed to seek damages against you.

Of course I don't agree with Canonical behaving this way especially as they claim to support GNU and open source (which I'm sure we all know is BS).

[lcorken]

How fun.
I file this whole thing under the category of attorney asininity.
Hmm, wonder if I can trademark the word asininity. Not likely, some attorney probably already owns it. Used in the job description I would guess.

http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu

The Ubuntu story
ubuntu |oǒ'boǒntoō|

Ubuntu is an ancient African word meaning 'humanity to others'. It also means 'I am what I am because of who we all are'. The Ubuntu operating system brings the spirit of Ubuntu to the world of computers.

I don't understand how a corp. can own an ancient African word or any other dictionary word for that matter.

Ken. King of asininity.

[kubicle]

interesting reading but the letter from a lawyer advising Canonical that their letter is in breach of the 1st amendment clearly does not know international law. Canonical is based in Britain (the UK) and therefore the 1st Amendment means nothing in Britain. In Britain, we don't have any such laws as freedom of speech or freedom of using trademarked logos. If a British company finds out that your using a trademark belonging to them then they are allowed to seek damages against you.

Well, firstly, judging by the lawyer's response I'm guessing Mr. Lee *is* a US Citizen (and resident, and on an US server). If Canonical wished to sue him, they would under international law need to do so in the States and under US legislation (there is no extraterritorial jurisdiction on trademark infringements).

Secondly, even EU and subsequently British trademark legislation permits all non-commercial usage of trademarks (free speech trumps trademarks everywhere) and some forms of commercial usage often referred to as "fair use" (otherwise newspapers wouldn't be able to mention names of companies that caused major environmental catastrophes, for example, without fear of costly law suits).

Trademark protection is very limited in scope, under both national laws and international treaties. The primary purpose of trademark laws is to protect consumer interests, never to protect trademark holders from criticism...and they are actually written that way. (This obviously does not mean trademark holders won't try to abuse them)

[oshunluvr]

interesting reading but the letter from a lawyer advising Canonical that their letter is in breach of the 1st amendment clearly does not know international law. Canonical is based in Britain (the UK) and therefore the 1st Amendment means nothing in Britain. In Britain, we don't have any such laws as freedom of speech or freedom of using trademarked logos. If a British company finds out that your using a trademark belonging to them then they are allowed to seek damages against you.

You a lawyer, Nick? AFAIK, Micah works at EFF. EFF is in the US. I'm not a lawyer, but last time I checked, UK laws mean nothing here. International copyright (if any exists in this case) is handled by the Berne Convention, not BCL. If Canonical we to attempt legal action, they've have to do it here and thus would be subject to our laws. [sad attempt at humor] BTW, we have the 1st amendment specifically because of your Kings of old. Those that don't like it can stay on their side of the pond. And oh yeah; a lift is a thing in a short man's shoes, not a device for going up or down floors in a building. Silly British... [/SAAH]

Seriously; I'm off Canonical for good now. Imagine the stones required to try and use FOSS software for profit and then attempt to subjugate free speech. Screw them. Some of the comments below the article are priceless. As I said, I'm no lawyer. But that sort of tactic will bring nothing but pain. Especially against an organization who's sole purpose is the defense of individual rights in the "Digital World."

[NickStone]

No oshunluvr I am not a lawyer thats why I made the mistakes in my post. The world would be a much better place without lawyers, everytime I hear or see a lawyer I'm reminded about the old joke - What do you do if you see a lawyer drowning? Throw him a rock.

And anyway, Why shouldn't a device that lifts you up a building then lifts you back down again be called a lift? You silly Californian !!!

[sithlord48]

canonical you guys have been making some very bad decisions lately,im almost ahamed that im a kubuntu user because of your actions. any new installs will not be any *buntu for me .

i vote +1000 to rebase on debian! i'll help with what ever i can too just need to know what i can help do .

[GreyGeek]

This is just unbelievable! Shades of SCO

Pulling this lawyer stuff has just tipped me over the edge. I'll be following Dibl to Debian and installing KWheezy ASAP.
The sooner Kubuntu switches to a Debian base the better, IMHO.
And, like Dibl, I'll be staying on this forum.

[Danum]

Maybe Canonical got the idea from Debian, after all Debian did the same with regards to www.debian-multimedia, and then had the cheek to ask for it to be transferred to them, but it fell on stoney ground, and if my memory serves me correctly someone in Poland now. owns it.

[dibl]

"fixbuntu" is not the same as "ubuntu". "debian" is the same as "debian". I think there's a difference there. The repo at www.deb-multimedia.org is functioning perfectly and debian has no objections to it.

[claydoh]

*yawn* the site used the ubuntu logo in it's title graphic, as well as the term "ubuntu" (perhaps as opposed to a site like omgbuntu, which *almost* uses the full word, but not quite, and no ubuntu logos)

Also, (and of course ianal) I do believe that at least in the US, a trademark holder *has* to at least occasionally respond to issues with its trademark in order to be able to legally hold and keep it if there is a challenge.

So, to sum up, in my non-expert opinion, it is the use of the full Ubuntu name and logo in the site's title, the site's domain name, and the use of the logo as the logo for the site that is the issue here. If the graphic where in an article or someplace not in the header, and the site's domain and title were, say fixbuntu instead of fixubuntu, there would have been no form letter sent.






Man, the interwebz sure seems to be having that time of the month every day it seems.

[kubicle]

While a trademark holder may need to react to obvious trademark infringements (it's not necessary to react to all infringements) to avoid abandonment, reaction is not necessary when there is no infringement such as non-commercial (which seems to be the case here) or nominal fair use.

The EFF seems to agree with me :
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/trademark-law-does-not-require-companies-tirelessly-censor-internet


EDIT: OOps, edited instead of replied, dang.
Of course the original message is gone now...