Ubuntu Business Remix update

[Mark Shuttleworth]

Hi folk

Allison made me aware of an off-list discussion amongst the TB regarding 
the Business Remix. Here's an update from my perspective, and to avoid 
further confusion please keep me and/or the CC in the loop on similar 
conversations in future.

  * The work has been done as a remix specifically to avoid concerns 
about Canonical's best  work on packages going into anything other than 
the archives which are widely available. The team had to re-do their 
work to meet this requirement.

  * Steve Langasek raised a concern with me, that Partner might not be 
considered "part of Ubuntu" for remix purposes. That was a surprise to 
me, and is a simple omission rather than intended outcome. We index 
Partner packages in the Software Center - they are as much part of 
Ubuntu as multiverse it - they reflect packages where redistribution is 
not possible, and Canonical has to be directly involved as a contractual 
requirement of the ISV. We should simply clarify this in the remix 
guidelines if it is an issue.

  * There is no new precedent on proprietary bits here - remixes can 
certainly already pull from restricted and multiverse.

  * To avoid a delta in the installer and other packages, the EULA's of 
included packages from Partner will be presented through the web on 
download rather than in the installer or desktop UX.

I don't believe there are any technical issues that warrant concern on 
the part of the TB, but am happy to be part of the discussion if you 
feel otherwise. From a CC perspective, again I don't believe there are 
policy questions or concerns. We would have no issue if a third party 
published a remix of this nature. It was a debate as to whether the name 
should be "Canonical Business Desktop" or "Ubuntu Business Desktop", we 
felt the awkwardness of differentiating this from Ubuntu was very high - 
we do not want to be lumped in the same category as "Fedora / RHEL" as 
it is a completely different proposition from both Ubuntu and Canonical. 
There's no legal issue w.r.t. the trademark, both because this is a 
remix (and within guidelines for the use of the name) and because 
Canonical owns the mark in the first place.

Mark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/attachments/20120124/a7274785/attachment.html>