On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:57 PM, P. Larry Nelson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> zxq9 wrote on 6/13/2012 12:32 AM:
>> On 06/13/2012 06:44 AM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
>>
>>> (On this list, are we really required to say "TUV" instead of
>>> "***censored***",
>>> as if we were playing a 1984 double-speak live action game?)
>>
>>
>> Yes, because lawyers have made even casual conversation a legal minefield
>> for
>> reasons other than getting disappeared by the Thought Police.
>>
>> Pretty much anything trademarked, burdened by customer guarantees of any
>> sort,
>> or otherwise encumbered in any way should be referred to obliquely on this
>> list.
>> This sounds silly, I know, but the reason is that the labs who support
>> this
>> project don't have the bandwidth or the desire to even open a conversation
>> about
>> how to open a proper, legal, trade protections unencumbered conversation,
>> and to
>> that end terms like "TUV" are used around here.
>>
>> Not that TUV is a bad player -- *far* from it -- but why even open the
>> door in
>> case the wind starts blowing the other way?
>
> Could someone who maintains this list (Connie? Pat?) please confirm or deny
> this seemingly absurd policy!
>
> I have not searched the archives of this list, but of the 1824 messages I
> have saved locally over the years, for one reason or another, 333 of them
> contain "Redhat" in the body of the message, while another 74 contain "Red
> Hat".
> I don't recall anyone ever getting their typing fingers slapped.

You forgot to check for RHEL. :)