Summary: Why OpenSUSE-derived distributions can avoid the Microsoft/Novell patent liabilities, probably by avoiding the SUSE/OpenSUSE trademark
OpenSUSE LXDE (variant of Ballnux) is not a normal Novell project, but it uses Novell trademarks. LXDE is a relatively new project. "It is maintained by an international community of developers," according to the OpenSUSE Wiki. OpenSUSE LXDE is built on OpenSUSE, but might as well rename itself and distance itself from Novell. Microsoft's deal with Novell forbids use of OpenSUSE to make money; basically, Microsoft and Novell agreed that OpenSUSE users will be "safe" as long as they are just so-called 'hobbyists'.
A few weeks ago we saw that OpenSUSE sought more independence from Novell, which is up for sale. Generally speaking, OpenSUSE would be better off forked and made independent from the whole patent deal [1, 2].
The branding in this distribution is still property of Novell. If they change it, then people will no longer associate this unofficial distribution with Microsoft. Let Novell take care of OpenSUSE, which technically is not so bad. From a new (p)review of the coming release:
Overall, openSUSE 11.3 does a decent job and packs the usual extras you would expect from a project that feeds into a commercial, enterprise Linux distro like SLED.
Well, but it comes with obligations to Microsoft and it therefore has limitations inherited from Novell. Why not rebrand derivatives/flavours/forks of OpenSUSE? That might actually overcome the contract Microsoft signed with Novell -- a contract that specifically mentions OpenSUSE, a property of Novell. ⬆
If the election is run by platforms that have back doors "baked-in" and if the communications are overseen by GAFAM, you would not have to be a "nutty MAGAt" to dispute the outcome
"It means a situation in which somebody accuses someone else of a fault which the accuser shares, and therefore is an example of psychological projection, or hypocrisy. Use of the expression to discredit or deflect a claim of wrongdoing by attacking the originator of the claim for their own similar behaviour (rather than acknowledging the guilt of both) is the tu quoque logical fallacy."
