On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Rob; > > JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try > on this logo thing ... I have some questions. > > What would be the implications (if any) of using > a legally licensed commercial font? >
Our ability to use such a logo would depend on the specific terms of the font license. But in general, a commercial font license might lead to restrictions on how we redistribute images using the font. For example, we might only be able to redistribute rasterized bitmaps of a logo, but not a scalable vector image that included a font glyph definition as well. A commercial font might also restrict who in the project is able to modify the logo or create derivative logos for the benefit of the project. I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the use of a commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong design reason for not using a font with few or no restrictions. > Ariel pointed to some nice splash screens done > previously in the Wiki, can those be (re)used > as a starting point? > I have no objections. But I think right now we're talking about the general theme of the Drew's logo proposal, i.e., the distinctive design elements of: - text - color - type face - spacing - background - embellishment. - and so on If there is consensus on that, then there will be follow up design work to incorporate that logo into a variety of locations, including a splash screen. But I think there is a hesitation to invest in that additional work until we're sure the basic design is OK. -Rob > cheers, > > Pedro. > > --- Mar 3/1/12, Rob Weir <[email protected]> ha scritto: > ... >> 2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <[email protected]>: >> >> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we >> actually have a >> >> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue >> registration for "Apache >> >> OpenOffice" >> > >> > Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could >> not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org >> instead)? >> >> We're talking about the full mark, "Apache >> OpenOffice". I have no >> reason to think this could not be registered. >> >> In any case, we already discussed this, voted, and the >> choice was >> "Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking about the >> graphical ogo that >> will reflect that name. >> >> > -- >> > Pavel Janík >> > >> > >> > >>
