[steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy

Hi,

Von: "Charles-H. Schulz" <charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org>

Hmm, if that confuses you, it will confuse otgers.

I htink, what is confusing here is that ...

>
> I'm not super-attached to the TDF tagline for distro/personal builds,
> but I am attached to using the default logos, whichever they are, for
> distro/personal builds.

... our default logos in the source tree use the TDF tagline (at least this
was when I last did a build from source), but the tagged logo should
be used for "instance on .. software builds compiled by the Document
Foundation".

Imho quite easy to resolve: use the community logos per default for builds
from source. Enable the Logo with TDF tagline on build time and tell people
to use this only when doing builds that are supposed to be distributed
via TDF resources.

regards,

André

Hi,

... our default logos in the source tree use the TDF tagline (at least this
was when I last did a build from source), but the tagged logo should
be used for "instance on .. software builds compiled by the Document
Foundation".

Imho quite easy to resolve: use the community logos per default for builds
from source. Enable the Logo with TDF tagline on build time and tell people
to use this only when doing builds that are supposed to be distributed
via TDF resources.

that indeed sounds like a senseful idea. What do others think?

Florian

Hi :slight_smile:
+1
Sounds good to me but i'm curious about the Branding Team's thoughts on this.
Italo?
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

Its the logical conclusion. Do we think this is a desirable thing
however ? rather than a corner the rules paint us into that force
maintainable of duplicate logos, etc.

C.

Hmm I still think our subline would be valuable for gnu/linux distributions.
We may insert our previous language I think.

Charles.

Hi,

... our default logos in the source tree use the TDF tagline (at least

this

was when I last did a build from source), but the tagged logo should
be used for "instance on .. software builds compiled by the Document
Foundation".

Imho quite easy to resolve: use the community logos per default for

builds

from source. Enable the Logo with TDF tagline on build time and tell

people

to use this only when doing builds that are supposed to be distributed
via TDF resources.

that indeed sounds like a senseful idea. What do others think?

Florian

--
Florian Effenberger <floeff@documentfoundation.org>
Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation
Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108
Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to

steering-discuss+help@documentfoundation.org

Problems?

http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/

Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive:

http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/

All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be

deleted

Caolan McNamara wrote:

> > Imho quite easy to resolve: use the community logos per default for builds
> > from source. Enable the Logo with TDF tagline on build time and tell people
> > to use this only when doing builds that are supposed to be distributed
> > via TDF resources.
>
> that indeed sounds like a senseful idea. What do others think?

Its the logical conclusion. Do we think this is a desirable thing
however ? rather than a corner the rules paint us into that force
maintainable of duplicate logos, etc.

It makes the whole thing much more consistent, therefore it makes a
lot of sense to me.

The tm rule then boils down to: stuff from the official tdf/libo
website - TDF mark permitted. Stuff from elsewhere: TDF mark not
permitted, unless permission explicitely granted.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

+1

So, if OpenSUSE wants to use the TDF logo in the distro all they need do
tis ask - but if 3 guys on an IRC channel decide to roll their own Linux
Distro, then on day one it would be the Community Logo.

[Side note - hopefully when future decisions are made to allow
commercial operators to use the TDF mark the community will be involved
in that decision, in some way]

//drew

I'd +1 Thorsten's short summary, but does it work with Debian rules?

Best,

Charles.

Caolan McNamara wrote:

> > Imho quite easy to resolve: use the community logos per default for

builds

> > from source. Enable the Logo with TDF tagline on build time and tell

people

> > to use this only when doing builds that are supposed to be

distributed

> > via TDF resources.
>
> that indeed sounds like a senseful idea. What do others think?

Its the logical conclusion. Do we think this is a desirable thing
however ? rather than a corner the rules paint us into that force
maintainable of duplicate logos, etc.

It makes the whole thing much more consistent, therefore it makes a
lot of sense to me.

The tm rule then boils down to: stuff from the official tdf/libo
website - TDF mark permitted. Stuff from elsewhere: TDF mark not
permitted, unless permission explicitely granted.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to

steering-discuss+help@documentfoundation.org

Problems?

http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/

Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive:

http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/

All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be

deleted

Hi :slight_smile:
+1
if it could be that simple then it would be easy to give quick answers to
requests. I'm not sure what the relevance of Debian is.

Could there be an agreement now to allow any distro in the top 100 (or just top
50?) at DistroWatch

http://distrowatch.com
to use 'the proper' logos and splash-screen rather than the community versions.
Any other distros that contact TDF could be dealt with one at a time but it
might help to have a blanket agreement covering the most popular ones.

Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

Hi,

if it could be that simple then it would be easy to give quick answers to
requests. I'm not sure what the relevance of Debian is.

Could there be an agreement now to allow any distro in the top 100 (or just top
50?) at DistroWatch

http://distrowatch.com
to use 'the proper' logos and splash-screen rather than the community versions.
Any other distros that contact TDF could be dealt with one at a time but it
might help to have a blanket agreement covering the most popular ones.

I would not give general permissions. Permissions that are different from the standard policy should always be granted on an individual basis / case-by-case basis.

Florian

+1

It would make sense I suppose, looking at Linux distro's for instance,
to construct a reasonably simple mechanism for non-commercial users to
request the logo - perhaps a web form, the request could be sent to a
mailing list, a standing practice _could_ be to allow use after some
period of days after request assuming no one objects. (just a off the
top of the head thought)

//drew

Hi :slight_smile:
Good point. There are a LOT of distros out there so perhaps it might be best to
save up applications until there is a batch to work through to help with
work-flow. Anyway, there is no point worrying about this unless the TDF
suddenly gets swamped with tons of requests and that would give the batch
anyway! lol

Ok, lets forget this suggestion and get back to what this thread was really
about before i side-tracked it (apols) :slight_smile:
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

Hi Tom, all!

A quick note ... mis-using the steering-discuss being an SC deputy.

Sounds good to me but i'm curious about the Branding Team's thoughts on this.
Italo?

I'm not Italo, but I'm one of those who (with Bernhard, Nik, Ivan, ...)
developed the today's branding. Personally, I would be happy if we could
ship the non-tagline logo - and add the tagline on demand. This will
make things more simple and even more visually attractive.

When we worked on the motif design, Nik already made a draft how this
could look like:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/cgi_img_auth.php/b/b3/ScatterInContext_bunch.jpg

So +1 to the proposal.

One thing that - then - needs to be addressed is the todays tagline
logo. Later this year, I'd like to propose a small revision to make
non-tagline and tagline logo more consistent.

Cheers,
Christoph

________________________________

Alright, swap the logos, default to non TDF one.

a) The current with TDF logos are the ones in default_images/brand for
the about box, the splashscreen and the backing window
b) We have a --with-intro-bitmap and --with-about-bitmap for custom
splash and about pngs
c) So move the current ones to e.g. a TDF brand dir, grab the non-TDF
pngs from somewhere and stick those into the generic dir
d) Then for all the distro-config/*conf where the vendor is "The
Document Foundation" add --with-intro-bitmap/--with-about-bitmap to
point them to the TDF branded ones

So...

a) Where are the appropriate non-TDF about, intro *and* backing window
images ? Do they exist somewhere already ?
b) Looks like we don't have an option for selecting an alternative set
of backing window pngs (default_images/brand/shell) ? Is there another
way to do that already, or should we re-work and simplify
--with-intro-bitmap and --with-about-bitmap to be a single
--with-brand-images which points to a dir that contains a full set of
intro, about and backing window images

C.

Hi :slight_smile:
Thanks for jumping in there :slight_smile: I hoped there were other people from Branding
around or at least other people that might have some vague idea about the
issues.

It's ok for the rest of us to guess but it's better to have the right answers
from the right people because there is a strong chance of the rest of us getting
it wrong and falling into 'obvious' traps. Italo was the only name i knew for
certain.

Thanks and regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

Hi,

Alright, swap the logos, default to non TDF one.

if we do so, are there any objections to my proposed trademark policy change? Here it is again for convenience:

old version:

Proper Form: TDF marks should be used in their exact form, neither abbreviated nor combined with any other word or words. TDF has a set of acceptable logos for general use. If you are not sure where they are please inquire on our lists. Only the logos that bear the exact mention of the software name with the mention “The Document Foundation” are reserved for the sole and official use of TDF as an entity, for instance on splash screens from software builds compiled by the Document Foundation or DVD labels officially stemming from the Document Foundation. You may not use this set of logos but only the logos bearing the software name without the Document Foundation's mention.

new version:

Proper Form: TDF marks should be used in their exact form, neither abbreviated nor combined with any other word or words. TDF has a set of acceptable logos for general use. If you are not sure where they are please inquire on our lists. The logos that bear the exact mention of the software name with the mention "The Document Foundation" are reserved for two purposes:

* the sole and official use of TDF as an entity, for instance on splash screens from software builds compiled by the Document Foundation or on official materials from the legal entity itself

* the use within the Projects of the Community - like documentation, marketing or website - when the respective work is prepared and coordinated openly and transparently, on the appropriate communication channels, following the Foundation's and Community's principles

/Example: A publisher working on a documentation with a few selected community members is not eligible for use of logos with the mention "The Document Foundation", whereas the documentation team itself may freely use it for any project that is coordinated on its mailing lists.

You may not use this set of logos for other than the above purposes, but only the logos bearing the software name without the Document Foundation's mention.

Florian

I think this is the correct approach and believe that it will avoid the problems that led to the IceWeasel fork of Firefox.

S.

So - FWIW, IMHO all of this is a bit over complicated; the more text we
add the weaker the policy. I would personally rather prefer to subset
our TM policy to the name 'LibreOffice' and the associated marks; and
then have some other blurb about when using the TDF mark is allowable -
which could be much looser, and separate.

  OTOH, this is an improvement I guess.

  ATB,

    Michael.

Hi,

  So - FWIW, IMHO all of this is a bit over complicated; the more text we
add the weaker the policy. I would personally rather prefer to subset
our TM policy to the name 'LibreOffice' and the associated marks; and
then have some other blurb about when using the TDF mark is allowable -
which could be much looser, and separate.

  OTOH, this is an improvement I guess.

that might make sense. To proceed, I propose I now incorporate the changes if nobody objects by tomorrow, and we then still can work on a new version in the near future.

So, if anyone vetoes to my latest draft (http://www.mail-archive.com/steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg01443.html), please let me know by tomorrow, otherwise I will publish it in the wiki, thus modifying our official trademark policy.

Florian

Hello,

if we do so, are there any objections to my proposed trademark policy
change? Here it is again for convenience:

the changes are now in effect.

Florian