“Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#1

Post by zdw » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 4:52 PM UTC

“Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”
anonscm.debian.org

Re: “Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#2

Post by adrianmalacoda » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 5:15 PM UTC

I take it the Debian derivative from Canonical that cannot be named is sort of like a Prominent North American Enterprise Linux Vendor[0] for the average user?

I'm curious if there's some sort of backstory to this.

[0] http://www.pnaelv.net/

Re: “Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#3

Post by cconover » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 5:16 PM UTC

adrianmalacoda wrote: post #2

I take it the Debian derivative from Canonical that cannot be named is sort of like a Prominent North American Enterprise Linux Vendor[0] for the average user? I'm curious if there's some sort of backstory to this. [0] http://www.pnaelv.net/

Here's the backstory: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/canoni...

Re: “Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#4

Post by puller » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 5:17 PM UTC

No context. Seems petty?

The issue was about the logo

Re: “Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#5

Post by lowlevel » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 5:17 PM UTC

Speaking it's name only makes it more powerful.

Re: “Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#6

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 5:20 PM UTC

puller wrote: post #4

No context. Seems petty? The issue was about the logo

[deleted]

Re: “Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#7

Post by Karunamon » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 5:23 PM UTC

puller wrote: post #4

No context. Seems petty? The issue was about the logo

Petty as all heck on the part of Canonical, I agree.

Re: “Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#8

Post by piqufoh » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 5:25 PM UTC

cconover wrote: post #3

adrianmalacoda wrote: post #2

I take it the Debian derivative from Canonical that cannot be named is sort of like a Prominent North American Enterprise Linux Vendor[0] for the average user? I'm curious if there's some sort of backstory to this. [0] http://www.pnaelv.net/

Here's the backstory: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/canoni...

To quote U$@u

> Ubuntu is an ancient African word meaning 'humanity to others'.

Issuing take down notices? Stay classy Mark Shuttleworth

Re: “Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#9

Post by adrianmalacoda » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 5:27 PM UTC

cconover wrote: post #3

adrianmalacoda wrote: post #2

I take it the Debian derivative from Canonical that cannot be named is sort of like a Prominent North American Enterprise Linux Vendor[0] for the average user? I'm curious if there's some sort of backstory to this. [0] http://www.pnaelv.net/

Here's the backstory: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/canoni...

Thanks. I'm not a fan of the whole Unity Amazon integration deal myself, but I think there's a clear difference between a site critical of Ubuntu using their name in the domain and their logo in the header image versus a passing remark in documentation or code.

Mind you, I think the original case was a clear attempt at abuse of trademark law against legitimate criticism. I do feel, however, that the distro-that-can't-be-named remark sounds petty. If they want to avoid mentioning Ubuntu they could just say something like "Debian derivatives."

Re: “Remove occurrences of the short name of the Debian derivative from Canonical”

#10

Post by pfortuny » Fri, Nov 08, 2013, 5:27 PM UTC

May it be said that humanitytoothers is also unpronounceable?

Can I use it in my homepage?

The domain humanitytoothers.com is available! What does that mean?