On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Tom Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/07/2015 09:50 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:24:07AM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote: >>>> We have a policy for possibly delegating trademark approval to various >>>> SIGs. <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_approval_policy>. I'd >>>> like to update "SIG" to read something like "SIG, Working Group, or >>>> other Fedora committee or team". Any objections? >>> >>> I'd like there to be some sort of Fedora Legal veto in there. I don't >>> anticipate ever having to use it, but I don't want anyone to think it >>> doesn't exist. >> >> That seems basically reasonable. Wouldn't, however, that be a part of >> <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines>? It >> actually does not seem to be; currently, that document says approval is >> granted by the Council without any mention of a separate veto. > > I think it was implicit that the Council/Board would honor Fedora > Legal's veto. The only reason I bring it up now is because we're > delegating it out to SIGs who may not be aware of that situation. > > If you'd rather have me put it in the Trademark_guidelines, I have no > issue with it being there, but I do want to make sure the SIGs are aware > of it. I'll a bit confused by the goal here. Point 3 in that proposed approval policy says, "Once approvals from appointed SIGS are done, the Item will be submitted to the Council (via a ticket) for trademark approval." So is the SIG really doing the approval or just some vetting of the request? John _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/council-discuss
