Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org [LWN.net]

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 15, 2022 16:25 UTC (Tue) by bluca (subscriber, #118303)
Parent article: Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

This is really bad news - on top of that, this individual is such a toxic and bad faith actor, that I'd much rather LWN wouldn't have picked up this news item, as it gives him attention. Don't feed the trolls.

to post comments

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 15, 2022 16:32 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (7 responses)

I thought long and hard before posting this, but it seemed like relevant news in the end and it was hard to justify leaving it out.

We have, incidentally, reported on this individual's activities in the past.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 15, 2022 22:52 UTC (Tue) by gerdesj (subscriber, #5446) [Link]

On balance, Jon, I agree.

I think it is fair to consider your audience here when deciding on matters like this. LWN is not your usual "social". The readers and commentators hereabouts are generally ... reasonable. Unless the matter in hand is C vs C++ vs Rust in the kernel in which case there isn't a big enough bikeshed.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 17, 2022 17:59 UTC (Thu) by hartmans (subscriber, #135969) [Link]

I actually ended up finding out about this from the LWN article. Now, you might argue that I should have known through other channels, but for whatever reason I didn't.
Knowing was important to me for a number of reasons. So, while I agree that I don't want to see Pocock given more attention, I also want to be able to depend on news sources for news:-)
And at least for me this was news. Thanks for reporting.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 20, 2022 22:57 UTC (Sun) by julian67 (guest, #99845) [Link] (4 responses)

You certainly did the right thing to publish this story. Just because Daniel Pocock's behaviour has been unsavoury and disruptive doesn't give Red Hat a pass to also cross a line, or for their actions to go unreported. If this was the kind of site which ignored bad news about its friends it wouldn't be worth a subscription. We can get PR for free. I don't have a beef with Red Hat. I understand why they did what they did; this guy must be extraordinarily irritating when he's the mosquito and you're the person getting needled. Although the story appears embarrassing for Red Hat it probably hasn't done them any reputational harm, and it does shine a light on the behaviour of Mr. Pocock. If he has a reputation it didn't just get a boost.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 21, 2022 8:45 UTC (Mon) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] (3 responses)

If he has a reputation it didn't just get a boost.

It does give him ammunition to use elsewhere as in, “Red Hat tried to sue me and they lost, so I'm right!!”

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 21, 2022 9:54 UTC (Mon) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link] (1 responses)

He gets that ammunition regardless of whether or not LWN reports on it, though. And by reporting on it, LWN increases the chance that people are aware of the details of what happened (a fairly routine trademark licensing decision), not just Mr Pocock's claims whatever they may be.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 21, 2022 17:41 UTC (Mon) by pebolle (guest, #35204) [Link]

> And by reporting on it, LWN increases the chance that people are aware of the details of what happened (a fairly routine trademark licensing decision), not just Mr Pocock's claims whatever they may be.

LWN should report on whatever happens around free software no matter what the consequences. Otherwise it ends up in the limbo where reporting on sports or popular culture wanders (providing entertainment). Or, perhaps more accurate, the limbo where reporting on the arts wanders (with their palpable fear of admitting that much of the current arts is below par).

Because whenever LWN reports on events that make free software and the people involved in it look bad - and there's no shortage of those - it will at the end of the day benefit free software. And if free software can't withstand proper scrutiny than it doesn't deserve our support.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 25, 2022 23:59 UTC (Fri) by flussence (guest, #85566) [Link]

Jack Thompson took a psychiatric evaluation just to say he was certified sane too; neither of them can win over an audience of informed people though. That's the most effective thing one can do when dealing with conmen (and the law isn't helping) - make sure truthful and verifiable information is easy to come by.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 15, 2022 16:54 UTC (Tue) by brunowolff (guest, #71160) [Link] (7 responses)

I disagree. I don't think companies should be able to shutdown commentary they don't like by taking domain names from others. I haven't looked at Daniel's site, but even if I thought the site was problematic, I don't think trademark based attacks on domain names are a good thing. If the site itself has actual trademark violations (not nomitive use or other kinds of fair use), then they should be able to get an injunction applied to the site regardless of what the domain name is.

Trademarks and domains

Posted Mar 15, 2022 17:19 UTC (Tue) by josh (subscriber, #17465) [Link] (1 responses)

I do, in general, think that it should be possible to use a trademark to name an entity you're describing or criticizing.

It'd be very different if this were `wehatefedora` or `whatswrongwithfedora` or `fedorasucks`. But the domain name here *sounds* like it could be part of the Fedora community, which is misleading. And the finding *did* agree it was confusingly similar.

It seems like a primary consideration here was that Fedora in fact has guidelines that permit the use of the trademark in some circumstances, and that caused the problem here.

Trademarks and domains

Posted Mar 15, 2022 17:56 UTC (Tue) by brunowolff (guest, #71160) [Link]

You can't tell if it is a trademark infringement without considering the whole site. A potentially confusing domain name might be part of that, but that doesn't make the domain itself infringing, so that a trademark owner can take it. Red Hat doesn't own all uses of the word fedora in domain names and should not be able to sieze a domain using wemakefedora. The proper remedy is an injunction on the site and making similar sites in the future (assuming a violation is found).
If trademark owners wanted their own play area they should have asked ICANN to create a .trademark domain (tm is a country code) instead of convincing ICANN to created an unfairly (IMO) biased UDRP.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 15, 2022 23:20 UTC (Tue) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link]

This is not an accident or a single occurrence, it's a pattern. The individual in question also runs other conspiracy-theory-laden, when not outright defamatory, cesspools, trying to masquerade as being "part of the community", skirting the line using the project's name to appear legitimate to a distracted and casual look. I'm not going to name them, because again, we should not feed the trolls.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 18, 2022 0:12 UTC (Fri) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646) [Link] (3 responses)

This is not about shutting down commentary.

This is about fighting one troll who did already sever damage to other open source projects in the past. (Jon posted a link to an LWN.net article that I don't want to repeat - don't feed the trolls!)

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 18, 2022 9:48 UTC (Fri) by brunowolff (guest, #71160) [Link] (2 responses)

The end does not justify the means. Taking the domain is not a proper way to do that and I think it is a good thing that Red Hat lost in their attempt to do so.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 18, 2022 11:31 UTC (Fri) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646) [Link] (1 responses)

Bullocks. The whole issue is about the means and not the end.

This guy has a proven record to impersonate as a member of open source projects that have banned him. He registered Web sites (as a mean) to spread slander and harassment (the end). Here, he registered a Web site that shall obviously be used to repeat his tactic, as he did with Debian and other projects.

Thus, guy uses a *deceptive* domain registration that was obviously made *in bad faith* as a mean to further his end. Trying to stop that is a fight against his mean, not against his end.

This was already explained to you by josh and bluca. Your reaction to josh was not constructive. Please note, that this is LWN.net and not Slashdot.

Red Hat fails to take WeMakeFedora.org

Posted Mar 18, 2022 17:01 UTC (Fri) by brunowolff (guest, #71160) [Link]

I disagree. Red Hat should have no right to seize domains from other people. The domain wemakefedora.com could be a meanifull reference to lots of things that have nothing to do with the Fedora Project that does software development. Several replies have been about how bad this person is and how this jusifies siezing that domain. That is exactly using the end to justify the means. If the web site contained trademark violations or some kinds of defamation then there are legal remedies to stop that behaivor that don't involve seizing the domain and could be more effective, since there are lots of domain names that could be used as a way to easily reach the site. I think the determination was correct in that this was an abuse of process by Red Hat and they should have used a different forum for trying to deal with this issue.