On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:52, inode0 <inode0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 10:15 AM, inode0 <inode0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Either way I'm not suggesting we shouldn't follow the advice of Red >>> Hat legal on this matter. I'm just a bit unclear about the boundary. >>> We seem to create under free licenses images that are intended to >>> represent the Fedora Project in various ways currently without to my >>> knowledge asking Red Hat legal to approve them. Is there something >>> about a "logo" that makes that process different? >> >> Let's be explicit. Give me two examples of existing image creation >> which you feel fall are meant to represent the Fedora Project that >> fall outside the existing trademark usage license language that covers >> the official wordmark and graphical logo? > > Why are you asking me to give you such examples? I certainly did not > say there were any such images in violation of trademark guidelines. > The images I had in mind don't contain any marks. While not containing > any marks something like the four foundation cloverleaf still does get > rightfully associated with the Fedora Project. > > Really, I just asked a simple question. Does the Fedora Board > representing the Fedora Project have the wherewithal to declare a > particular image (I assumed an image not containing any Red Hat owned > marks) a freely licensed Fedora Project logo. I do not know and we can ask. -- Stephen J Smoogen. “The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance.” Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University. "We have a strategic plan. It's called doing things."" — Herb Kelleher, founder Southwest Airlines _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
