This is really a tempest in a teapot. The Cornell/UVA use and Red Hat's use of the name do not conflict. One is for a digital management system and one is for a Linux distribution. I suspect anyone who can spell the word "computer" will know that they are not the same thing.
Cornell/UVA are making this into more than it is - Red Hat's own lawyers
have said that they can't see any way that there could be a conflict. See
http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/11/20/HNredhatfedora_1.html for more
info.
Thomas
I strongly disagree. It is RedHat that is making the problem by wanting to trademark the name Fedora. There was not objection from the Cornell/UVA group until RedHat took that action.
Red Hat is trademarking Fedora *as it relates to a Linux operating system distribution.* Red Hat admits that Cornell/UVA have prior use and are not contesting that. See http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/11/20/HNredhatfedora_1.html, the paragraph beginning "The researchers have common law rights that protect their use of the Fedora name, according to Webbink." Note that Webbink is Red Hat's counsel. Red Hat has made clear they have no intention of interfering with Cornell/UVA's use of the Fedora name as regards to its digital management system.
Read the info on Red Hat's filing at http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=78296509. You will notice that they are very specific about the trademark application being for "Computer software, namely, computer programs for operating systems, and instructional manuals provided therewith as a unit."
The Cornell/UVA folks and some people in the community are making more of this than they need to. Red Hat is not the villain here. They are just trying to protect the hard work they're doing with the Fedora distribution. They have no desire to impinge on the Cornell/UVA folks, and it is a pretty wild stretch of the imagination that this would ever happen.
Thomas
