On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 21:55 +1000, James Purser wrote: > I'll second that call for a FAQ, just to minimise the amount of > confusion that could arise, and the amount of FUD that could/would be > generated. There is also the fact that these things have just taken time. Even those of us on ctte sometimes have to go back and refresh our memories. The confusion seems to come from an ignorance in .au about the Linux trademark (and associated things). There is also confusion about who needs a license and the best way to solve that is to just ask! From the front page of www.linuxmark.org: > "to protect the public and LINUX® users of the world from unauthorized > and confusing use of the Linux® mark and to issue proper licenses to > authorized users of the Linux® mark." LMI is not designed to generate > profits for anyone, which is why Torvalds has given LMI primary > sub-license rights for the mark. We work to protect legitimate uses of > the LINUX trademark without burdening Linus Torvalds or any one entity > with the financial responsibility of protecting the LINUX community's > use of the mark. hope this clarifies, (we're not the evil ones - just trying to protect the good name of Linux) -- Stewart Smith (stewart@linux.org.au) Committee Member, Linux Australia
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part