O_o

[Muhammad]

http://www.imagine-msn.com/spaces/images/leftpane/medbucket_right1.jpg


??????????????????????????

[qalimas]

That's called ripping :D

[newbie2]

http://www.imagine-msn.com/spaces/images/leftpane/medbucket_right1.jpg


??????????????????????????
http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=1743702

[escuchamezz]

microshafted :-P

[Muhammad]

http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php?searchid=1743702

And the logo remains there...?

[izmaelis]

OK. If you think that this logo is a copy check my reply's attachment. (-:

[chimera]

Well,it's GPL and open source,so they have the right to rip the logo,isn't that true(please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong)?


chimera

[NeoChaosX]

We have had 4 or 5 threads about this topic already, guys. Most everyone here is already aware of it. :roll:

[Lovechild]

Well,it's GPL and open source,so they have the right to rip the logo,isn't that true(please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong)?


chimera

You're wrong, the logo is, probably, trademarked and as such can't be used without permission - I'm unsure of the usage guidelines for the logo though.

[TravisNewman]

the logo isn't exactly gpl or open source. It IS Trademarked. You can view the policy here:

http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ubuntu/TrademarkPolicy/

[Kvark]

Well,it's GPL and open source,so they have the right to rip the logo,isn't that true(please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong)?


chimera
No, identity is not open source, only knowledge is. You can learn from Ubuntu and put smart features it has into your own project. But you can't put Ubuntu's logo on your own project to make people think Canoncial stands behind your project.

[chimera]

Well,I wasn't aware of that.If it is trademarked,why can't ubuntu people just sue them for (ab)using trademarked stuff?


chimera

[Kvark]

Well,I wasn't aware of that.If it is trademarked,why can't ubuntu people just sue them for (ab)using trademarked stuff?


chimera
Because Microsoft is located in USA so a case against Microsoft would be there too and in USA it's the one that can burn the most money on the case that wins. Ubuntu is good for 10 millions in total, Microsoft would spend a couple hundred millions on the case. So Microsoft would definately win and the loser would have to pay for the party. Ubuntu's total budget on 10 million would not be nearly enough to pay what Microsoft would spend so that'd be the end of Ubuntu.

[wmcbrine]

I don't necessarily agree that Microsoft would win the case. But I think Ubuntu has better things to do with their time and resources.

[jdong]

Who cares? I doubt a case can be proven -- the overall resemblance to the Ubuntu logo (color wise) is pretty questionable. Plus, what's to lose? I personally think it's free advertising for Ubuntu :)

[godzero]

Why, oh why do people think that GPL = Public domain. If it was public domain, it would be called ...drumroll... public domain.

When a developer releases something under the GPL, he still maintains ownership of his IP. (S)He just chooses to give use some rights too.

[newbie2]

We have had 4 or 5 threads about this topic already, guys. Most everyone here is already aware of it. :roll:
if you type in the search window on this forum : 'msn + spaces' you can see all the threads about this logo ;-)

[bored2k]

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=29050&highlight=msn+spaces