[bryanlarsen]

"plainly stated that there is no process or tool which can ever be made that would turn an Ubuntu install into something that could be redistributed"

Mark Shuttleworth is referring to the process to redistribute something called "Ubuntu".

You could certainly create and distribute a tool that would strip trademarks from Ubuntu, and distribute both that tool and your hacked version of Ubuntu, as long as you don't call it Ubuntu. Nobody's willing to do that simply because a version of Ubuntu not called Ubuntu isn't worth much to most people interested in doing such a thing.

If OVH called their hacked-up version of Ubuntu "OVHuntu" they'd lose some of their customers to competitors who have a "real" Ubuntu install option.

[grifferz]

Mark Shuttleworth is referring to the process to redistribute something called "Ubuntu".

The email from Mark seems extremely clear that Canonical's position is that there is no way to distribute a derivative of Ubuntu without 1) joining the Ubuntu community, and 2) asking for permission to distribute.

It does not clarify that all you need to do is remove Canonical's trademarks. It flat out just says that you can't distribute a derivative without permission.

Mark's email is a response to one asking for guidance on what would have to be removed in order to do perform non-infringing distribution. It doesn't ask Ubuntu to do this work of removal. It asks Ubuntu to identify what work needs to be done. mjg59 suggests that he will do the work, possibly by means of having his upload privileges to Ubuntu reinstated. That seems to be an indication of him being willing to do it.

The reply then comes from Mark stating that there is no work that could be done to enable this.

You could certainly create and distribute a tool that would strip trademarks from Ubuntu, and distribute both that tool and your hacked version of Ubuntu, as long as you don't call it Ubuntu.

That appears to be the sort of thing that mjg59 proposed to create, but was told that would never be allowed. Mark's email is literally a response to a request for clarity on what needs to be done to not infringe, i.e. how to do what you are suggesting is permitted.

[mhall119]

> possibly by means of having his upload privileges to Ubuntu reinstated. That seems to be an indication of him being willing to do it.

He wouldn't need upload rights, he could do the work and ask an Ubuntu Developer to review and sponsor it. In fact, anybody can contribute anything to Ubuntu this way, doesn't matter if you're an old kernel hacker or a total newbie.