On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 19:54 +0200, Pierre Schmitz wrote: > Am 09.07.2012 18:44, schrieb Tom Gundersen: > > On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:21 PM, David C. Rankin > > <drankinatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 07/09/2012 11:16 AM, Daniel Wallace wrote: > >>> > >>> Because Archlinuxarm is unsupported by Archlinux. it is a seperate > >>> project. The same reason archbang, chakra, bridgelinux, and > >>> archlinux-ppc are seperate as well. > >> > >> > >> Grrrr. Thanks Daniel, > >> > >> That's what was confusing -- ARM certainly looks official flying the Arch > >> Linux trademarked logo, etc.... > >> > >> So I guess anyone can create any forum and fly the Arch logo? Sounds like > >> a "cease and desist" letter would fix that problem. > > > > Notice that some use of our trademark by derivatives is allowed[0]. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Tom > > (who recently started using ArchLinux ARM and is a big fan) > > > > [0]: > > <https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:TrademarkPolicy#Permitted_Use> > > Judging from a brief read of that paragraph I would even conclude that > they cannot really use our name and trademark directly as they changed > too much. :-) > > They chose to be completely independent from us which has up- and > downsides. And as lots of other derivatives thy implemented their own > tools and infrastructure. > > It'll be interesting what could happen in the future. E.g. there was > once an independent port of Arch called Arch64 which was merged into > Arch itself some day and we started to officially support x86_64. I > don't see such things happen any time soon if at all. But if we indeed > see capable hardware at some point and we developers start using the arm > port such things might happen naturally. That being said, I am happy > that people are already working on such a port. > > Back to topic: I see how users might get confused by naming and logos. > The same happens with archlinuxppc.org. But I'd rather not have a strict > policy about trademark use and enforcing it (see how the Debian/Mozilla > -> Iceweasel/Firefox issue did any good). Maybe we can encourage the arm > people to work more closely with us though. > > Greetings, > > Pierre The logo is including typography and so it differs exactly as wanted by the policy http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/styles/simplecorp/imageset/ALARM-2.png a more famous example for "typography" can be a "logo" http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3c/Cocacola_cyrilic.JPG/170px-Cocacola_cyrilic.JPG http://www.archlinux.org/art/ > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:TrademarkPolicy - Ralf
