Hi Chad, Seb, * "Chad Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 12/5/05, Sebastien Lanteigne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> What about modifying the logo, specifically on the splash screen. >> >> For exemple the logo on the splash screen in Ubuntu Linux has bee >> changed to have orange/brown gulls. >> >> I my opinion the logo is part of OO.o identity and should not be >> change unless it follows certain guidelines. >> >> Is this allowed? >> >> Seb. > >According to the liscence (LGPL), you don't have to keep the logo at all. >You can rename, relogo, rebrand, whatever. And people do. A lot. That's right - but there is just one small point Seb has mentioned - and we have discussed it about two months ago: The logo itself is *not* LGPL, nor licened under another open license. See http://marketing.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=art&msgNo=1022 > >If you want to be associated with the main OOo project, you probably want to >keep the OOo logo, or at least as close as possible. But there is nothing >preventing a given project, (NL or otherwise) changing the name to Free >Office or Unclosed Office or Bob's Business Pack. No problem if they rename it ... > >So it can be rebranded, but it would be nice to keep it as close to the >official OOo as possible. ... but using the official logo is (at least from a legal point of view) not allowed without permission. I don't think, that the CC (or Sun) would force Ubuntu to change their splash screen - but they could, if they wanted to. In the past it was not clear how to use the logo - so it was included in many open licensed products without mentioning, that it is proprietary licensed. We started to create a document describing who is allowed to use or to modify the logo without explicit permission. But this will take some time, I think... Best regards Bernhard --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
