Red Hat gets legal over logo
I ONCE WAS asked to give my support to a software company seeking to protect its name being usurped by a proposed revamp of a sweetie brand so you could say that I’m a sucker for this kind of thing. But can you believe that Red Hat is engaging Messrs Sue, Grabbit and Run over what it says are contentious similarities to one of its logos?
According to ReadWriteWeb, Red Hat briefs have sent lobby group DataPortability.org a cease-and-desist letter over the logos. It’s Friday and perilously close to pub time so Halesie probably won’t post the images, and anyway we owe the source a hit, so click here to see the spooky closeness in design.*
That’s right, it’s a number eight on its side, a Dick Turpin mask, or an infinity sign. Or something like that. Anyhow, ReadWriteWeb has some fun comparing Red Hat’s position on Microsoft’s openness pledge and its apparently less than open attitude to logos.
However, let’s be a bit more generous and say that legal letters are sometimes sent out as a marker just in case something more serious comes along later, as any journalist who has used the word “biro” or similar sans capital letter will testify.
Red Hat did not immediately reply to a request for comment or have a post on its press blog site on the matter. µ
* Pub time came and went, obviously
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
First point: I'd recommend that people go check the link for themselves...just look at the pictures and ignore the text for a few seconds. RH aren't claiming to own the infinity symbol as stated; but the similarity between the logos is undeniable. Look at orientation, colour, alternation of colour, etc. Also, speaking from experience the representation of Redhat's logo on this page isn't very representative, and is (deliberately?) poorly chosen to maximise apparent differences in hue between logos.

If someone had taken the PS2's control symbols (square, triangle, circle, & cross) five years ago, subtly changed the coloring, and used the result as a brand for, say, a new game publisher exclusive to the XBox platform, how do you think Sony would have reacted?

Second point: Redhat aren't claiming the violation of any commercial logo; they're protecting the identity of the FREE, OPEN, NON-PROFIT FEDORA project. Fedora may be upstream of Redhat, and there is certainly a great deal of cooperation between the organisations; but Fedora also forms the basis of an increasing number of other distros, potentially commercial competitors to RH. Fedora development etc is independent of Redhat.


In a perfectly competitive market, product differentiation & brand is everything. Redhat are doing the right thing to protect a nonprofit organisation, albeit via (enlightened) self-interest.
In the US if you do not defend your trademark you loose it. It's a simple matter of RH defending their trademark so they won't loose it..it's not RH being a prick..it's them doing what the law requires them to do. Centos ran into this as well. RH took a lot of heat for them doing something similar to Centos but it's just how US trademark law works..:) I've had a great dialog with the author of this story..:)