Re: Press Release on Aryabhatt Linux

[Arun Sharma <adsharma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Jun 04, 2000 at 08:28:03PM +0530, Nagarjuna G. wrote:

Good job, Nagarjuna. We need these kinds of fraud advisories. But
I'd like to make a few suggestions on moderating the tone of
the article.

> 1. RedHat Trademark Violation?

This probably can go much lower on the list. Redhat is a for profit
enterprise and they are perfectly capable of enforcing their trademarks.

> 2. Linux trademark violation?: Linux is a registered trademark of
>    Linus Torvalds who was the original developer of the Linux
>    kernel. He has permitted use of this trademark subject to an
>    explicit mention of his ownership. Neither their web site nor
>    the product packaging mentions this fact.

Have you communicated with them on this ? Did they just ignore your
request ? 

> 
> 3. It is not an original Indian Linux distribution: The Aryabhatt
>    Linux is a distribution based on another Linux distribution
>    viz Red Hat Linux 6.1 as mentioned on the product packaging.
> 

Any Linux distribution can be argued as non-original, because parts
of it were written outside of India - in Finland, UK and the US.

> 4. Misrepresentation of License: Most of the programs distributed
>    in Red Hat Linux are licensed as GPL (General Public
>    License). This licensing policy permits anybody to go through
>    the source code and modify as per their requirements. It also
>    explicitly requires the GPL to be mentioned clearly. Arybhatt
>    Linux does not seem to have been licensed under GPL since
>    the GPL copy on the CD is issued by Red Hat and not by Linux
>    Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

I'm surprised. If they duplicated Redhat CD, it should have GPL on it.
Are you saying that it isn't mentioned clearly in their product literature ?

> 
> 5. GPL requires distribution of source code as well as free
>    download of source code: Under GPL it is mandatory to
>    distribute source code FREE OF COST either on CD's or on ftp
>    sites. As on date Linux Technologies has not made any
>    provisions for the same.  The company also does not have any 
>    ftp sites.

s/Free of cost/Cost of distribution/

If they're not making binaries available on a ftp site, they don't need
to put the sources either.

> 
> 6. The Graphics Driver for SiS6215: Graphics Drivers for SiS6215 card
>    were developed by SuSE GmbH (suse.com) and XFree86 (xfree86.org)
>    and copyrighted under GPL. Linux Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
>    falsely claims to have developed the same.
> 

AFAIK, all of XFree86 is licensed under the X license = MIT license
= BSD license, without the advertizing clause. Do you have a reference
to say otherwise ?

> 7. Misuse of Linux Logo: The Linux logo which depicts a penguin
>    has been affectionately referred to for a long time as Tux by
>    the entire Linux community. It also appears on most of the web
>    sites, publications and articles pertaining to Linux. Other
>    Linux distributions also feature Tux on their packaging. By
>    writing Peggy across the penguin and registering it as their
>    own trademark, Linux Technologies Pvt. Ltd. has attempted to cash
>    in on the popularity of Tux and deeply hurt the sentiment of Linux
>    users.

If they used it in a particularly tasteless manner, it'd probably make
sense to complain. It's perfectly legal and an accepted practice to
trademark logos and other art work. The BSD daemon for example is
trademarked by Kirk McKusick:

http://www.mckusick.com/beastie/index.html

>    
> 8. The picture on product packaging box: The product packaging
>    box as well as the step by step User Guide of Aryabhatt Linux
>    depict a picture of peggy surrounded by networked
>    computers. This picture was designed and copyrighted by
>    Jassubhai Digital Media and was published in the August 1999
>    issue of CHIP magazine, CHIP Linux special and Network
>    Computing.
>     

Good point. Is CHIP aware of this ?

> 9. Most of the applications in any Linux Distribution are developed by
>    GNU (www.gnu.org). Linux Technologies Pvt. Ltd. does not
>    acknowledge the same.

That'd be similar to the BSD advertizing clause and Stallman doesn't
approve of it. They may have a valid point in saying there are too many
people to acknowledge - Kernel/Apache/X11/Perl/Python.

> 
> 10. Though Aryabhatt Linux is claimed as "customized for the
>    Indian user", as on date, it does not support any Indian
>    Language. And the claimed hardware support for the locally
>    assembled hardware already exists in other distributions of
>    Linux.

That should be the center piece of your criticism, IMO. 

> As Indians we would love to have an Indian Linux distribution but
> we are thoroughly disappointed and disgusted with Aryabhatt
> Linux's blatant attempt to hijack the efforts of the open source
> and free software community.

You might want to soften the language for your criticism to have
any effect.

> This ruthless exploitation of free, open source software will tarnish
> the image of the Indian software industry.

Indian software "industry" is largely made up of closed source programmers
and therefore incompatible with much of what you've said in the rest of
the mail. "Exploitation of free software" is a controversial term, which
comes up from time to time on this list.

> Contact Address: GNU/Linux User Group of India, Bombay Chapter

I do not approve of "GNU/Linux" and neither did most of the people here, 
nor do the people who wrote what is the popularly accepted meaning of
the word "Linux" (i.e the kernel) when it came up the last time. 

Also, there were many claims in your article about GNU project being the
primary contributor to Linux. That doesn't stand the test in terms of
the number of lines of code, from analyses I've heard. Lots of people
approve/disaprove of their policies to various degrees - so you might
want to avoid treading on controversial territory.

All in all, I think the criticism should focus more on:

1. Little value for indian users
2. Lack of innovation
3. Questioning their competence
4. Deceptive marketing tactics

and less on:

1. Exploitation of free software
2. Trademark violations of third parties	
3. GPL enforcement

To avoid going off topic, I'll mail my views about the Indian software
"industry" in a separate mail.

	-Arun