Great! Good luck!
Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
OK, so we've had a day or so to look over the proposal, and it seems like
no one is pulling hair or gnashing teeth over it. Therefore, I'm moving
on to the next step:
Taking it to counsel. (Dum-dum-DUUUUUM!)
I'll be working with counsel to nail down a version of the Acceptable Use
Policy that they can accept. I'll keep everyone informed as I move
forward.
--g
-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
OK, we've danced around this for a while. Lots of good suggestions, but
no one has really taken ownership of this -- largely because it's kind of
hard to do, especially if you're not @redhat.com.
So I sat down with Max today and we worked through some of the issues. We
came up with a proposal to settle these issues once and for all. The goal
is to have an actionable plan, that everyone agrees with, that we can
implement quickly.
If everyone agrees, I'll take it to counsel asap and we'll work out
details.
* * *
The Basic Issues:
There are two sets of issues. One set revolves around TRADEMARK
PROTECTION. The other set revolves around POLICY OF USE. The two are
related, but they are not the same.
First of all, TRADEMARK PROTECTION. Because the Fedora logo is a
registered trademark, this means that we must protect it -- specifically,
that we must "police" it. What do we mean when we say "police" it?
Simply, it means that we have guidelines for its use, and we're actually
pursuing people who use the logo without adhering to the guidelines.
Now, it's my understanding that these guidelines can be as liberal as we
choose to make them, so long as (a) the guidelines are enforceable, and
(b) we actually make the effort to enforce them. These guidelines are our
POLICY OF USE.
We've been arguing about this problem for months because it's a hard
problem; our POLICY goal is to make the logo as ubiquitous as possible,
but our LEGAL goal is to make the logo as easily policed as possible.
These goals are to some degree contradictory.
The key, we believe, is to make it as simple as possible to navigate
through the guidelines -- even if the guidelines themselves are not
simple.
* * *
Deliverable #0: Acceptable Use Policy (AUP).
It all starts here. We need to nail down *exactly* what usages of the
logo are allowed, and exactly what usages are not allowed. This may take
further debate, but here's a start:
LOGO USE AND SOFTWARE REDISTRIUBTION. The logo may be used by:
* Anyone who redistributes Fedora Core as-is. No permission required.
* Anyone who redistributes any functionally complete subset of packages
from the Fedora Universe -- also known as an "official Fedora derivative".
No permission required.
* People who are redistributing something based on Fedora, but who are
NOT following the above redistribution guidelines, may NOT use the Fedora
logo. If they choose to use the text "based on Fedora," we won't stop
them.
LOGO USE FOR PROMOTIONAL PURPOSES. The logo may be used by:
* WEBSITE USE. Anyone who is using Fedora or its official Fedora
derivatives may advertise this fact using the Fedora logo.
* SCHWAG. Only members of the Fedora Ambassadors project may put the
Fedora logo on physical promotional items.
MISCELLANEOUS USES. If a user wishes to use the logo for a reason not
enumerated, users may appeal directly to "logo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" for
special dispensation to use the Fedora logo.
* * *
Deliverable #1: Fedora Logo Wizard.
We'll develop our Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) based on simple questions
and a decision tree. Something like this:
(clippy) I see you'd like to use the Fedora logo! Would you like some
help?
Are you redistributing Fedora?
(yes) Have you modified any of the ISO images in any way? (no)
Approved! (Logo_usage_ok_distribution)
(yes) Did you make unacceptable change #1? (yes) Sorry, you can not
use the Fedora logo, but... (Based_on_Fedora)
(no) Did you make unacceptable change #2?
(yes) Sorry, you can not use the Fedora logo, but...
(Based_on_Fedora)
(no) Did you make unacceptable change #n?
(yes) Sorry...
(no) Approved! (Logo_usage_ok_modification)
(no) Are you promoting Fedora?
(yes) Are you using the Fedora logo to sell goods?
...and so on and so forth. Basically, we should be able to ask a set of
questions that lead the requestors to *precise* policy decisions. We
should then collect their information in a simple database (read: flat
text file). Whenever we see a questionable use, we refer to the
"database" and act accordingly.
* * *
Deliverable #2: A "click through" for access to Fedora logo files.
See, the problem here is that having a click-through for Fedora logos is
basically useless. The simple fact is, people can go get Fedora logos
from dozens of websites, or from the desktop itself, and they can make
something that looks, for all the world, like an official Fedora logo.
Therefore, it makes no sense to have a click-through to gain access to the
"official logos" themselves.
Better, we think, is to have one prominent page where all of the logo
files live. At the very front of that page, we'd place a great big
notice, impossible to miss:
"Want to use these logos? Be sure to agree to THE SIMPLE TERMS (link).
If you don't and we find out about it, we will ask you to stop using the
logos. Why? Read more about TRADEMARK PROTECTION (link)."
And then pages and pages of spiffy Fedora logos and official variants.
* * *
Deliverable #3: A Fedora Logo Project.
This is beginning to look like a must-have. Everybody wants to play
around with the logo for various reasons, all of them perfectly good
reasons. They want a "powered by Fedora" button for their web server. Or
they want a Fedora theme that incorporates their LUG logo as well.
When we find a modified Fedora logo, here are our choices: 1. ignore it,
in which case we're not policing the mark; 2. prohibit it, in which case
we look like fascists; or 3. adopt it or explain in a friendly way why
it's not appropriate. Option 3 is by far the best, but it requires a body
that can serve effectively as arbiters, and is empowered to do so.
My guess: this would be a subproject of the Fedora Art project.
* * *
Anyway, that's the proposal. If you have an objection, please be as
specific as you can possibly be. We want to take action on this soon.
--g
-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
begin:vcard
fn:David Barzilay
n:Barzilay;David
org:Red Hat Brasil
adr;quoted-printable;quoted-printable:;;Av. Ang=C3=A9lica, 2.503 - 8o andar;S=C3=A3o Paulo;SP;01227-200;Brasil
email;internet:barzilay@xxxxxxxxxx
title:Marketing and Community Manager
tel;work:(+5511) 3124 6000
tel;home:(+5511) 3259 6212
url:http://www.br.redhat.com
version:2.1
end:vcard
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list
fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
