First, my apologies for cross-posting. Spot, Pam, et al: At today's Board meeting[0] there was some significant backlash to the proposed TM guidelines, specifically the non-software goods section. The principal issue the Board would like to understand is: What is the impact of not running requests for trademark approval for non-software goods through the yet to be created trac instance (as is currently the case). e.g. is there a risk to the trademarks from the lack of documentation of quantity, events distributed at, etc, or does this merely simplify record keeping/keep someone from looking at the various budget pages/meeting logs/mailing lists where these things are currently discussed/record. Additionally, a number of folks present at the Board meeting who are involved in the acquisition and distribution of Fedora swag were concerned with the additional overhead, and for clarification offered up the following workflow that already happens: Need for swag is discussed and agreed to by regional groups such as FAmNA, EMEA Ambassadors, in public. Designs either generated or proofed by Fedora Design (or are designs that have been generated or approved in the past) and are then ordered. The bill is subsequently paid by RHT (involving management approval of expense reports, auditing by finance etc). This presents the additional questions of: * Does RHT ultimately paying (and thus at least tacitly, if not explicitly approving of the usage) for the goods not make this TM usage on the part of RHT and thus not needing approval? * Is it permissible for the Board to delegate either to the various groups within Fedora that produce swag, or perhaps to the regional community RHT credit card holders, the ability to approve TM usage within a well defined swag/non-software goods category. * Despite the non-software goods section in the TM guidelines - swag has been produced without Board approval for at least the past 4 years - has there been a delegation of this authority already, or was perhaps the understanding that RHT footing the bill indicated RHT approval? [0] http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-02-22/fedora_board.2012-02-22-18.29.log.html _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
