I greatly support the gist of Walter's motion, and but before I vote would like clarification:
In order to fully protect Sugar Labs, Walter do we have written documentation (in public or not, but somewhere in our hands) that the XO trademark artwork is (as stated in the motion) "currently licensed under the GPL" ? Do you know who specifically is/was the source of this GPL declaration? Separately (if possible!) has this been reviewed as valid by legal counsel? *Thanks for clarifying what you can!* On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Samson Goddy <samsongo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sep 15, 2017 3:12 PM, "Walter Bender" <walter.ben...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The discussion regarding the status of the xo-computer icon seems to be > going around in circles. In my opinion, this makes it even more imperative > that the Sugar Labs oversight board respond to Tony's questions so that > Tony can proceed with his investigation in to our options. > > To state the obvious, this discussion is not about whether or not we can > change the xo-computer icon -- we can do that at any time in consultation > with our design team. The discussion is about whether or not we make that > decision on our own terms or be forced into a change. > > Motion: To answer the questions posed by the SFC regarding the xo-computer > icon as follows: > (Q1) Why is the XO logo included in the sugar-artwork repo now -- and does > the SLOBs want to keep it there? > (A1) The xo-computer icon has been part of Sugar since we first designed > and built Sugar (beginning in 2006) and we would like to keep it there > until such time as the design team decides there is a reason to change it. > (Q2) Assuming the SLOBs want to keep the XO logo in sugar-artwork: what > outcome would the SLOBs *prefer* to see happen? E.g., > - Does Sugar want downstream users to be able to redistribute and modify > Sugar's codebase with or without the XO trademark file included in the > program? > - Does the SLOBs want downstream users to be able to modify and > redistribute the XO trademark image itself, or is that less important to > Sugar? > (A2) Sugar Artwork, including the xo-computer icon, is currently licensed > under the GPL and we would like our downstream users to be able to use all > of our artwork under the terms of that license. As far as the use of any > trademark image outside of the context of Sugar, we have no opinion. > > I'd appreciate if someone would second this motion and, if it passes, the > results be reported to Tony by Adam, our SFC liaison. Of course, if the > motion does not pass, we will need to continue the discussion. > > I second the motion. > > > regards. > > -walter > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Walter Bender <walter.ben...@gmail.com> > Date: Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:48 PM > Subject: [SLOB] xo-computer icon > To: SLOBs <sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org> > Cc: Sugar-dev Devel <sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org> > > > As probably most of you are aware, yesterday one of our community members > unilaterally changed the xo-computer icon in sugar-artwork. The ensuing > discussion about the change is in the github pull request, "Urgent fix > logos", [1] > > The gist of his concern is that OLPC has a trademark on the XO artwork [2] > and there was concern that we were infringing and consequently downstream > users would also be infringing. > > As Sean Daly points out, this is not the first time that the topic has > come up [3, 4]. "In the past, OLPC was amenable to the use of the xo logo > in Sugar, but asked we not use it in marketing materials without a formal > co-branding licensing agreement." > > Personally, I think that OLPC was explicit in making the Sugar artwork > available under a GPL licence and that this is hence moot. But I am not > qualified to make that assessment. Consequently, I asked Adam Holt, our SFC > liaison, to raise the issue with the legal team. Tony asked us to consider > the following questions: > > 1) Why is the XO logo included in the sugar-artwork repo now -- and does > the SLOBs want to keep it there? > 2) Assuming the SLOBs want to keep the XO logo in sugar-artwork: what > outcome would the SLOBs *prefer* to see happen? E.g., > - Does Sugar want downstream users to be able to redistribute and modify > Sugar's codebase with or without the XO trademark file included in the > program? > - Does the SLOBs want downstream users to be able to modify and > redistribute the XO trademark image itself, or is that less important to > Sugar? > > The answer to the first part of Tony's first question is that the XO logo > was part of Sugar from the very beginning -- before Sugar Labs was split > from OLPC. We've never changed it. > > Regarding the second part: does the SLOBs want to keep it there? is > something we need to discuss. Personally, I think it serves its purpose > well -- a childcentric interface and it is "iconic" of Sugar. I see no > reason to change it. > > Regarding Tony's second question, I would want downstream users to have as > much freedom as possible: to use or not use the XO icon as they choose. > However, I don't see the need to expand beyond the context of Sugar. If > someone downstream wants to use the artwork for some other purpose, that is > not our issue (although I that the GPL license would be the relevant > determinant.) > > What do others think? > > Note, I think we should defer the discussion of what we would use as > replacement artwork until we resolve the current issue. > > regards. > > -walter > > [1] https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar-artwork/pull/96 > [2] http://www.trademarkia.com/xo-78880051.html > [3] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2008-December/003059.html > [4] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2011-October/014245.html > > -- > Walter Bender > Sugar Labs > http://www.sugarlabs.org > <http://www.sugarlabs.org> > > > > -- > Walter Bender > Sugar Labs > http://www.sugarlabs.org > <http://www.sugarlabs.org> > > _______________________________________________ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > i...@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > > > > _______________________________________________ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > i...@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > > -- > <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep> > <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep> > Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ > <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep>http://unleashkids.org ! >
_______________________________________________ Lista olpc-Sur olpc-Sur@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/olpc-sur