Can someone explain why it is not possible to simply ignore Canonical's aberrant behaviour and carry on as before? They aren't a court nor do they have any law enforcement powers, it's just a company expressing a preference.<p>Canonical: <i>"We require that you remove all trademarks entirely even if using them wouldn't be a violation of trademark law."</i><p>The rest of the planet: <i>"Go pound sand."</i><p>Isn't this a more logical response than submitting to their request? Are developers concerned that Canonical will haul them into court for an expensive legal battle, regardless of who is right? This can happen I suppose, but I am not seeing the down side to ignoring their demands.
What does Linux Mint do, especially given its modest popularity? I don't know about code but their website lists "Based on Debian and Ubuntu" as a "reason for succuss".
if you are interested in software freedom and think Ubuntu has a problem, then please explain how this redhat export control policy fits into your world:
<a href="http://www.redhat.com/licenses/exportcontrol.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.redhat.com/licenses/exportcontrol.html</a>
"I start wondering ..." announces another incoming bundle of FUD absent any confirmation from Ubuntu. Claims about the legal position of Ubuntu are flying around that are completely unsubstantiated. If we are going to publicly bury Ubuntu, let's not do it on the basis of fevered suppositions, let's have it from their own mouth.