On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:38:00PM -0400, David Nalley wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Chip Childers >> <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: >> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 02:07:07AM +0000, Mark Hinkle wrote: >> >> On 3/7/13 8:05 PM, "Mark Hinkle" <mark.hin...@citrix.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >Reposting due to formatting problems with last reply..sorry for the >> >> >inconvenience. Update is bottom-posted. >> >> > >> >> >On Feb 27, 2013, at 10:17 AM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> >> >> >wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 06:25:20PM -0500, Mark Hinkle wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On 2/26/13 1:16 PM, "Chip Childers" <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 04:04:34PM -0500, Chip Childers wrote: >> >> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 02:39:53PM -0500, Mark Hinkle wrote: >> >> >>>>>> I have the Lanyard sponsorship for #ChefConf this year on April >> >> >>>>> 24-26: http://chefconf.opscode.com/ >> >> >>>>>> I was planning on donating the sponsorship to Apache CloudStack to >> >> >>>>> help raise the project profile I know we have quite a few Chef users >> >> >>>>>too. >> >> >>>>>> Basically we get the CloudStack logo on the lanyards and a 50 word >> >> >>>>> blurb for the ChefConf#13 website. >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> Any thought? Mark >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Hi Mark, >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Thanks for bringing this to the list. David recently posted a Draft >> >> >>>>> brand management guideline document [1], which I think we should use >> >> >>>>>in >> >> >>>>> responding to this request (helping determine if it's reasonable and >> >> >>>>> useful for the project with a real-live test case). >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> I believe the relevant section is: >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Sponsoring Events: >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Sponsoring events can provide good visibility for the project, >> >> >>>>> however it frequently >> >> >>>>> requires funds that the project does not have access to. Many >> >> >>>>> outside organizations >> >> >>>>> wish to provide this type of visibility. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> In addition to gaining the approval of ConCom the following is >> >> >>>>> required: >> >> >>>>> * Sponsorship discussed and approved on the cloudstack-marketing >> >> >>>>> list. Approval is given by the (P)PMC. >> >> >>>>> * Sponsorship must be provided with no additional affiliation - >> >> >>>>>and >> >> >>>>> only project provided marks used. >> >> >>>>> * At least one committer must be planning to represent the >> >> >>>>>project. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> So given those draft requirements, obviously this is the first one >> >> >>>>> (although we'll >> >> >>>>> need to approve after discussion). Can you comment on the >> >> >>>>>affiliation >> >> >>>>> question? And >> >> >>>>> is a committer going to be present? >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Thanks for working with us on this, as we are trying to get a handle >> >> >>>>>on >> >> >>>>> our project's >> >> >>>>> brand management responsibilities. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> -chip >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> [1] >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guide >> >> >>>>>lin >> >> >>>>> es+(DRAFT) >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> I also realized that you mentioned the lanyard itself! That triggers >> >> >>>> another relevant section: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Non-software goods >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> * Without explicit written permission, goods bearing any of the >> >> >>>> CloudStack marks may not be sold. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> * Designs for non-software goods require both PMC approval and >> >> >>>> approval from trademarks@. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Since this is a give-a-way, obviously it's not a for-sale item. >> >> >>>> However, we're asking to approve the design (and trademarks@ would >> >> >>>>need >> >> >>>> to be involved as well). >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Thanks! >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> -chip >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> So this is a donation with no affiliation. All the donations I make >> >> >>> are >> >> >>> all for the sole purpose of promoting Apache CloudStack no other >> >> >>> organization or strings attached. At each event I donate we'll have at >> >> >>> least one committer (usually David Nalley or Joe Brockmeir). I also >> >> >>>have >> >> >>> reached out to some (non-Citrix) committers and offered to cover >> >> >>>travel to >> >> >>> make sure we are in compliance. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Ack - thanks. >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On the trademarks I just attended Shane's trademark talk at ApacheCon >> >> >>>and >> >> >>> the procedure as Shane C. explained it to me is: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> - Discussion here >> >> >>> - Approval by PPMC (David tells me it has to be explicit not lazy >> >> >>> consensus) >> >> >> >> >> >> Just to be specific, I think you covered the first concern (which is >> >> >> affiliation and a committer being present), but how about the physical >> >> >> lanyard? We'd need to see what that will be, or what logo you would >> >> >> use. >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm currently reserving judgement on "approval" until we see that >> >> >> design (which I'm sure will be fine!, we're just trying to be complete >> >> >> about things). >> >> >> >> >> >> Also, please note that we are going to start adding a (R) to the CS >> >> >> logos going forward, so we'll probably want to ensure that any imagery >> >> >> that you use has that included. >> >> >> >> >> >>> - Proposal to ConCom and then they'll kick it to Trademarks. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I was planning on getting permission all the way though and cc'ing >> >> >>> trademarks just for good measure. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Please keep cloudstack-marketing@i.a.o CC'ed during those approvals, so >> >> >> that we are aware of the status. >> >> >> >> >> >>> Also I had sent around a request for permission for the same kind of >> >> >>> sponsorship for Devops Days in Austin >> >> >>> >> >> >>> http://devopsdays.org/events/2013-austin/ >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> And you guys gave permission there but I need to run that by ConCom >> >> >>>too. >> >> >>> Technically you are right, though it has to go to trademarks but from >> >> >>>what >> >> >>> Shane and Nick indicated Concom will route as appropriate until after >> >> >>> CloudStack graduates then we need to go right to trademarks once we >> >> >>> are >> >> >>> done incubating. >> >> >> >> >> >> Great - glad that process got clarified. Thanks. >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Regards, Mark >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >The design is simply the logo from the Apache CloudStack website. if they >> >> >can do multi-color they would match the colors and if unicolor it would >> >> >be white. >> >> > >> >> >http://incubator.apache.org/cloudstack/images/logo-sm.png >> >> > >> >> >However CloudStack is a word mark. The CloudStack logo is not a >> >> >registered trademark, so if you want to add the R you can because of the >> >> >word mark but you would need to trademark the actual logo to include a >> >> >circle R. IANAL I just play one on the Internet. >> >> > >> >> >Mark >> >> >> >> Just trying to close the loop here I was going to give the following logo >> >> with the to the ChefConf guys >> >> >> >> http://tinypic.com/r/316on4n/6 >> >> >> >> I made the logo black so you can see it on a white webpage but the printed >> >> logo would be white on a blue lanyard. Logos would mirror what's on >> >> CloudStack.org and link back to the CloudStack.org website. >> > >> > AFAIK, we're going to need to change that from cloudstack.org to >> > cloudstack.apache.org. >> > >> > Can you wait until Monday-ish to send, so that we have cs.a.o up and >> > running? >> > >> >> cs.o redirects to i.a.o/cs and it's trivial to point it to cs.a.o >> >> Either way, should go to the same place. >> > > Fair - Realizing though that branding guidelines are that we use the a.o > address... if it isn't displayed, then we can use either. > > Generally though, we should keep in mind the need to use cs.a.o going > forward per [1]. > > -chip > > [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation//marks/pmcs.html#websites
Good point - libcloud redirects - openoffice keeps a user-facing site at its non-a.o domain. --David
