back to article Red Hat effort to shut down WeMakeFedora.org deemed harassment

IBM's Red Hat cannot prevent Daniel Pocock and his Software Freedom Institute SA from using the domain name WeMakeFedora.org, according to a ruling on Monday. Red Hat, which sponsors the development of the Fedora Linux distribution, challenged the inclusion of the trademarked term "Fedora" in the website URL, and demanded it …

  1. Michael Hoffmann
    Unhappy

    Smacks of IBM

    This has the stench of IBM lawyers all over it.

    1. a_yank_lurker Silver badge

      Re: Smacks of IBM

      Not familiar with Pocock but I am familiar with how Itsy Bitsy Morons and their shysters work. Agreed, this smack of good old shystering.

  2. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Don't give Pocock a voice here, please

      Given the definition of harassment currently includes "questioning poor decisions" and "disagreeing with the wrong person", you'll forgive me if I place little faith in your claims.

    2. DJV Silver badge

      Re: Don't give Pocock a voice here, please

      You are Matthew Miller and I claim my 2c.

  3. Tomato42

    Pocock is a wanker

    Others are a bit more diplomatic in how they talk about him: https://www.debian.org/News/2021/20211117

    1. Pascal Monett Silver badge
      Coat

      Re: Pocock is a wanker

      Well, at least he's got cock right in the name . . .

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Pocock is a wanker

      "Debian has investigated Debian and found that Debian did nothing wrong."

    3. JassMan Silver badge

      Re: Pocock is a wanker - Not!

      IANAL but having just read quite a bit of background into this story, I am struck by how thoughtful Mr.Pocock seems to be. I get the impression that the people who disagree with him, are the same as those who couldn't see the nuance in statements by Richard Stallman preceding his forced retirement (and later re-instatement) from FSF. Pocock also seems to be a very nuanced person who has taken no personal viewpoint on various recent controversies. He merely points out that lots of people wade in to discussions claiming first hand knowledge of events, when their knowledge is obviously 2nd or even 3rd hand, or possibly just heresay.

      It appears that the title used by Tomato42, is based simply on the anodyne statement by a Debian spokesperson which offers Pocock no right of reply.

      You can read a typical Pocock statement here. Judge for yourself whether he is a wanker as stated or whether he is just an anti-troll.

      I expect I will now also get loads of downvotes from people who read the first sentence of any webpage they come across, and believe they have completely understood all the nuance and complexity of an argument they haven't even read.

      We are all very time-poor these days but the world would be a much better place if people refrained from jumping on band-wagons before they find which way that wagon is heading. If you don't have time to read everything about an issue before making a statement, at least we can keep it from getting personal.

      1. Tomato42

        Re: Pocock is a wanker - Not!

        You don't alienate two large free software communities just by blinking seductively.

        1. HammerOn1024

          Re: Pocock is a wanker - Not!

          I'll take that bet!

          A question was posed recently on Reddit concerning a clearly gay teacher and what should/would one do if they showed up in your child's class room.

          I responded with a non-threatening, non-troll answer: Private school.

          I was immediately banned for life and I couldn't care less.

          They asked for an opinion, not a fact, and I gave it to them... funny how snowflakes go off.

          Factually, if they had asked for a factual response, I'd have said: So what does a persons chosen gender have to do with their ability to teach? Are they a good teacher or an indoctrinator?

          1. Tomato42

            Re: Pocock is a wanker - Not!

            Just because somebody is polite doesn't mean they're not a bad faith actor, see also: sealioning.

      2. doublelayer Silver badge

        Re: Pocock is a wanker - Not!

        I am not familiar with all of his statements. I have read the one you linked. However, it's difficult to decide which group of people is correct without a lot of background knowledge that they have and I don't. I can say that the statement you linked is not a clearly good one; it identifies inconsistencies in the actions taken by Debian to resolve a set of harassment claims. That's well and good, however, it uses those inconsistencies to jump to the opposite conclusion that Debian came to without doing any more to prove that one (I.E. Debian said this guy was wrong, there was a possible conflict of interest* and some sources who didn't announce themselves publicly, thus this guy must be perfect and the accusers are wrong). It also includes several strange statements, such as alleging that a person was likely present at a crime (which was also alleged to have not happened) and chose to do nothing about it. That's not a convincing argument to me.

        I cannot say who is right. I can say that when two large open source projects both decide they don't like you, there's probably a reason that's larger than disagreeing with their decision after you resigned.

        *The alleged conflict of interest was running for election to the board of an open source project, which doesn't strike me as a large one, but anything's possible.

  4. This post has been deleted by its author

  5. Tom 7 Silver badge

    They'd stand a better chance of a legal victory

    if they didnt try and stop people using a name that has been in use for the said hat for 102 years before you started the company.

  6. Tom 7 Silver badge

    Scared Cat Register!

    https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/16/red_hat_fedotra/ !!

  7. John_3_16
    Trollface

    I could be CONFUSED butt...

    I heard "gay" mentioned & "red hat" & "fedora" & "sealioning" & someone was "banned".

    Maybe the resulting friction was due to sexual confusion & mixed messages? You can be killed in prison for a pack of smokes. Life can be even cheaper on the outside. Many folks have been killed by scorned lovers even if the intended victim is completely unaware of the others confusion.

    Could the use of the term red hat/fedora in a url send a mixed message like tapping your foot in a stall while taking a shite? Since real facts are not available then I guess any supposition is possible. Good thing a real court stepped in to prevent this murder of a total innocent by someone suffering under delusional thinking.

    I mean get some therapy already. I heard from a reliable source that God might wear a red hat/fedora on judgement day & this delusion will not be a popular offense/defense there either. Just say'n... [̲̅$̲̅(̲̅ ͡~ ͜ʖ ͡°)̲̅$̲̅]

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022