Chris Tyler wrote:
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 09:19 -0500, Bryan Kearney wrote:
Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:46:58AM -0500, Jon Stanley wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
They seem reasonable for things which are aspiring to be Fedora(tm)
Spins. For those that don't want to use either of the trademarks, they're
obviously not that relevant.
Brings up an excellent question. Do they apply for just the main
Fedora trademark, or also the secondary mark? IMHO, we don't want to
be sullying the reputation of the secondary mark because we have a
sub-standard community-produced spin.
The "Fedora Remix" mark was invented precisely to avoid community
members having to go through an approval process. I made a wiki page
for easy redirection if needed:
So.. lemme throw this out again. What do folks think about the idea that
all spins in the spin-repository only carry the fedora mark. Not the
remix mark. If we did this, it would be very easy for the Spin SIG to
enforce the technical requirements.
Sounds right. If the word "Spin" is reserved for Spin-SIG & trademark
approved, then it's easy to explain what gets into the spin-repository
and what doesn't. Any aspiring Spin would therefore be a Remix until
it's approved, and for all remixes the technical quality and legal
status (with respect to non-Fedora content) is up to the remixer.
And.. if we want.. we can have a Remix-category which points to external
sources of remixes. That way we are being good and promoting them, but
saying that spins == trademarks.
-- bk
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
