On 8/31/07, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "You may also not then say that your product "contains Fedora" or is an > alternate "edition" of Fedora. You may say that your product is "a > derivative of Fedora" or is "built upon Fedora", but you must make it > clear that your product is NOT Fedora" > > This is based on "fair use" and you don't need explicit permission. You know, we should probably consider stating a single preference for how to communicate this. And make the stated preference easy to find in the text instead of buried in the middle of a longer paragraph. For example would we be okay stating something like this. </begin hypothetical statement: do NOT take out of context> The Fedora Project would prefer that you use the following text if you wish to state that your distribution is a derivative of Fedora: "The <Name of Distribution> distribution is derived in-part from sources and/or binaries from the Fedora(tm) Project." We prefer you use this statement because we feel that such a statement is adequate in preventing potential confusion between Fedora's offerings and derived works. </end hypothetical> I could probably also come up with a paragraph long text that I would ask derived projects to use in places like an "About" section on their website, which takes a little more space to clearly delineate the upstream downstream relationship between such a derived project and the Fedora Project. -jef"Still hoping we can come up with a secondary logo mark for all derived distributions to use to easily show a sibling relationship across distributions which are making use of Fedora Community contributions"spaleta -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
