4 ms·
Tutoring company pilfers logo from Linux distro
- johnnybgoode 17y agoThey interpreted the last letter this way: "It had become obvious that we were dealing with a person unwilling to comply with our request." I'm not so sure, however. I interpreted it as being a step away from an offer to change the logo while still saving face. Edit: I've sent this opinion to them; maybe it will have an effect?
- jcapote 17y agoI agree, they were at most 2 more e-mails (and a law firms letterhead away) from getting it removed.
- greendestiny 17y agoI think the best punishment would be letting them keep that awful logo.
- bravura 17y agoI agree, the second email sounds like the fellow is trying to backpedal while still saving face. I think he is waiting for Dusty (the complainant) to list demands.
- jrockway 17y agoI am amused by the tutor's use of the construction "would have went with" in his response. Someone who charges money for his English instruction should probably proofread his email (or learn grammar).
- palish 17y agoAnd yet, you understood what he meant. As I become a little less young, I begin to realize that perfect grammar matters less than I used to believe. And if someone would judge me for beginning this sentence with "And", then I probably wouldn't want to associate myself with them anyway.
- jrockway 17y agoI understood what he meant, but I now also think he's an idiot that can't write. You are free to use whatever English you want, but others are free to make inferences about who you are from that writing. It's best to write well (and "follow the rules"), so you have the best possible chance of not being viewed negatively.
- palish 17y agoSigh. Elitism and witch hunts are boring, don't you think?
- jrockway 17y agoElitism is not the issue. The reality is how most people respond to things without thinking. They see bad writing, they think negatively of the author. (If they see good writing, they think positively.) You can use their response to your advantage, or you can be "non-elitist" and have your writing ignored. I am not trying to be an advocate for either side, I am just explaining the facts.
- mhb 17y agoSo is the anti-intellectual retort that technically correct writing doesn't matter since people can manage to make sense of variously tortured constructions. People can figure out many aesthetically brain-dead web pages too, but I don't see a lot of critical comments of the critics of those counseling forebearance since the website can be used no matter how difficult it is. At the very least, correct grammar reduces the friction of transmitting your ideas to other people.
- dhimes 17y agoHe's a damn TUTOR! Most people get by knowing little math, but if you paid me money to teach it to your child, you would be foolish to overlook evidence that I didn't know it myself.
- tjr 17y ago
- Jem 17y agoAs someone who's been lifted from many, many times I feel I should be outraged by this... but I'm not. Given that the linux people aren't using the logo any more, why not just charge the tutoring people X amount for the logo and drop it? I imagine that 'Dr. Elias' is not entirely stupid, and would realise that paying for the logo is certainly likely to cost less than having to reprint office stationery, get new decals for the car, etc.
- johnnybgoode 17y agoGood idea. They could bring that up in a response to him.
- sachinag 17y agoThe problem is that the Linux folks haven't indicated that they'd be willing to discuss a payment option. Sure, C&Ds are often just a beginning negotiating tactic - but only when the other side expects it. Otherwise, it's just scary. The fact that the guy wrote back looks to be like "hey, I'm a good guy, but I can't possibly afford to change my logo, and I'll use the irritant language to look tough so that you pretty please don't call me on not being able to afford to change the logo on everything". Now, the Linux folks aren't in the business of licensing their logo, so it's probably suboptimal to try to figure out how to do a licensing agreement.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- ilyak 17y agoI'd recommend leaving them alone. I mean, you're no longer using it, why not let them too? Copyrights suck, after all.
- randallsquared 17y agoTrademarks aren't necessarily the same issue as copyright, but in this case, it does seem like leaving them alone would be best, since they (Arch) assert that they haven't used it since 2007. What with asking the community to intervene, however, it's likely too late for that.
- javert 17y agoWhat kind of precedent does that set for other free software projects? Although I disagree with you, I voted you up, because I think you brought up an important topic.
- zouhair 17y agoAs they don't use it anymore, they could ask the guy to contribute a minimum amount of money to some cause.
- JMiao 17y agoi think i'm more annoyed that the guy's obviously lying through his teeth while trying to assess how much shit he could possibly be in for. plus, that logo is horrid. looks like something an intern/temp would have worn on the starship enterprise.
- hs 17y agowill the tutoring company satisfy GPL requirement if it includes a dozen pages of GPL license on each of its tutoring materials (vehicles, documents, advertising, website and any other media)? assuming such logo is GPL
- patryn20 17y agoThe whole discussion was pointless, since the foundation members obviously didn't have any intention of pursuing necessary actions or the fortitude to take a firm stance. As such, all they did was waste the time of everybody involved. Sorry, but don't bother writing a warning if you have no intention of holding the line or negotiating a compromise.
- dhimes 17y agoFurthermore, the tutoring business is very tough. I bet the problem solves itself within 24 months.
- javert 17y agoI'm not so sure. The decision was made that it was worth the effort of asking him to stop using the logo. There's nothing wrong with asking. AFAIK, the Arch folks did not make any demands, such as "we will pursue legal action if you don't stop using this logo".