Why get something for free from FOSS providers when you can buy it for a lot of money from pedal board providers?
Apart from the use of the logos, which are only released for non-commercial use, this is hucksterism.
Anyone who has the time and inclination should leave a review on Amazon.
I reserve the right to take action against the use of the Garuda Linux logo.
Lawyers who want to take legal action (Lawyer's warning) are welcome to contact me here
Although no one seems to have bought it going by it having no reviews and stars in the product name to fool people.
Edit: I have tried to leave a review on it's page and amazon showed that it accepted my review though it hasn't been displayed on product's page yet. I am guessing either amazon is evaluating my feedback or they simply don't want my feedback since I haven't purchased the product.
Well I have also tried to report the product let's see what amazon does.
Redistribution yes - profiting off of a logo that has been kindly donated to a non-profit is disrespectful and frowned upon. Probably not worth legal action, but definitely negative reviews
Well at least the first one is basically priced as an empty USB stick, I'm not sure about the CD pack.
Whoogle gave me very confusing result:
I guess it swapped the currencies, but even accounting for that it seems overpriced for the usual "shipping and handling" cost.
Does use of the logo qualify as fair use, at least in some jurisdictions?
It's apparently used to represent the real thing after all.
I still have a pile of ancient distro CDs that came with computer magazines, I used to buy those when I did not have internet back in the day. I read that in some areas internet access is still a problem.
I think that there are no charitable thoughts behind this offer, because the shipping costs for the stick from Germany to somewhere else have to be added.
Using other people’s property rights of logos for one’s own marketing without being asked can have nasty consequences. We will see. After all, there are big players involved.
Back in the 1980’ ? and we do not know if they ask about.
It's not only insulting ,
They also didn't asked about it here,
So is it allowed to redistribute FOSS things in that way ?
Well i am not going to be to be extremely against this activity (because FOSS things are allowed to be redistributed but I don't know whether it is a right way to redistribute ? )
Well if thyy are doing then they would have to provide what are the benefits of using it , like :
1)You can flex it to your other colleagues
2) You would get more feeling of power
3) Will be able to show your superiority over other peoples in the society
4) Every one is going to see you as a chad (or hacker)
Sharing is perfectly legal as long as it remains free of charge. What is free on Amazon?
We offer direct download, sourceforge and bittorent. Free of charge. Garuda supports (through donations) worldwide download opportunities. There are other providers who make this possible free of charge.
We and others do this for free and not for profit.
That makes the difference.
Everything is free except for the artists' copyrights, protecting everything else would also be too expensive for the small distributors.
Therefore, it is unfaithful to use the logos for marketing.
I see ...
But I don't think that amazon would take any action as they are being profited and mostly there is no mass audience to criticise it , and until there is no big force behind it then why would these big giant companies would do anything like taking action on that seller ?
Really that is totally unfair with the maintainers and volunteers of these softwares , we are providing it for free then why are charging for that thing which is not your work ?
It’s scummy but they are providing a service for those who don’t know or want the hassle of flashing the distribution themselves as some may be less technically able. Obviously it’s something people can learn and the people selling this stuff should be asking for permission etc first but I’d understand it if they at least made it their own and then sold it. Not just a straight one for one copy
It is unfair to everyone, starting with Linus, Arch Linux, etc..
We all benefit from the many volunteers who offer their knowledge for free.
No one should make undeserved profit from this work.
Mmm.... if downlading an iso then formatting a pendrive and then flashing it through things like balena-etcher in a single is hassle for someone ?
Then it would be a bigger hassle to change BIOS settings , learn about a new OS other than windows and specially getting used to it for that person , I think M$ would better take care of these people .
I mean try and teach your grandparents the concept of flashing an ISO when Windows becomes unusable. I’ve tried and it’s almost impossible but they can understand pressing a button when the device powers on and selecting something. Obviously I’d do it myself for family but isn’t always possible straight away when in different cities etc. So these usbs with everything on makes sense to me but it’s just about stealing the distribution with no changes whatsoever and not asking for permission which is the problem
Another thing that occurs to me seeing this:
It is one thing if this are "clean" 1:1 ISOs.
But what happens if this ISOs are not working, corrupted whit even more bloatware
or even viruses.
Who would end up with the consequences
The "good" case would be a lot of angry posts in the forum
in the bad cases you have to explain thar you are not responsible/ liable to some lawyers.
and that would be a massive waste of time and money.
This thing come from a third person that is at least a bit shady
But maybe I am just overthinking this.
Das ganze nochmal auf Deutsch:
Mir kommt da nur so ein Gedanke:
Es ist ja das eine wenn dies "saubere" 1:1 ISOs sind.
Aber was ist wenn diese ISOs nicht richtig funktionieren, noch mehr Bloatware beinhalten
oder sogar mit Vieren verseucht sind.
Wer muss sich dann mit den Konsequenzen rumschlagen?
Im besten Fall gibt es nur wütende Posts im Forum
Im schlimmsten Fall müsst ihr Anwälten erklären das ihr nicht verantwortlich seit bzw. haftbar seid.
Das wäre eine massive Zeit und auch Geld Verschwendung
Immerhin stammen die Dinger von einer Dritten und offensichtlich leicht zwielichtigen Person
vielleicht mache ich mir da auch einfach zu viele Gedanken.
?
and we do not know if they ask about.
