On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> wrote: > > cc/ [email protected] > > > > I'm looking at the information we have on the project site for Trademark > > Usage > > > > http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/trademarks.html > > > > First item, logos: > > > > "For the Apache OpenOffice project these trademarks include the names > Apache > > OpenOffice and OpenOffice.org, as well as the graphical logo." > > > > I would take this to mean the current logo on the "trademarks.html" page, > > which is not the same as the logo on the website: > > > > http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos/OOo_Website_v2_copy.png > > > > -or- the older web logo > > > > http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos/ooo-logo.png > > > > So, I would like to do a few things: > > > > - also put > > http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/images/300x100_dj_trans.png > > > > in > > http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos > > > > Change > > > > "For the Apache OpenOffice project these trademarks include the names > Apache > > OpenOffice and OpenOffice.org, as well as the graphical logo." > > > > -- to -- > > > > "For the Apache OpenOffice project these trademarks include the names > Apache > > OpenOffice and OpenOffice.org, as well as the graphical logos." > > > > and link the word "logos" to all elements in: > > > > http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos > > > > (there's actually one item in there we aren't using which I need to > remove) > > > > I will also change the logos area in: > > > > http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/ > > > > and list all possible logos in: > > > > http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/ > > > > > > I don't think we should limit the text to refer to a specific closed > set of logos. But changing this to plural, maybe saying "and various > graphical logos" or, "and graphical logos, including but not limited > to", is fine. > What I'm trying to accomplish is to make it easier for the end user to distinguish between things they need to ask permission to use -- a finite set of actually "trademarked" items I'm assuming (but it could be my understanding of that term is just wrong), and things they don't -- because they fall under some licensing -- LGPL, PDL, or ALv2. So, in this context, I am not understanding the phrase -- "including but not limited to". Why isn't this set limited? > Remember, a trademark is not limited to a specific file. It protects > the symbol, which might occur in slight variations in various files. > And we're not limited to a single symbol. Right, which I why I wanted to point them to just the items in /images/AOO_logos so they know exactly which ones they need to request permission for. The question is really > whether we're using that symbol to market our product, that is > associated with our product and identifies us as the source of the > product. So from a trademark perspective we could have several > trademarks, But from a marketing perspective that might be confusing. > > ( A good, but dry article on this trademarks and open source software > is here: A good read on some of the issues here: > www.ifosslr.org/ifosslr/article/download/11/38 ) > > > Second item, other artwork: > > > > All artwork in: > > http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/ > > > > seems to be either LGPL or PDL. > > > > I would like to include some verbiage on the above page that will advise > > viewers to review the licensing for the object(s) they would like to use > and > > tell them simply (I think this would expedite usage. If we did this, I > think > > the ONLY thing they might explicitly require usage for is the actual logo > > and nothing else): > > > > The license only deals with the copyright. It doesn't give permission > to use the trademark. > No,it doesn't. I'm sorry -- maybe I was too confusing. It's ONLY the trademarked items that we consider logos. We need to have them continue to request permission for those. > I'm not sure what we want to expedite here. If we want to expedite > something specific, we can think of ways of doing that. For example, > look what we did with the "Get it here!" logo. We made a special logo > for use under specific conditions, but without any further permission > requests. For everything else, we still require explicit permission. > We OK -- that's what I'm trying to clarify. I saw the page for "Get It Here". > If we want to expedite other kinds of logo requests, then we should > probably think in similar terns, e.g., identify exactly which logo and > under exactly what conditions we want it to be used. > I'm thinking more in terms of expediting uses of the other artwork elements. Or do you think this isn't necessary given the license statements? > > I don't think we should give any permission for using any other logos, > unless we've defined such conditions. We should always keep in mind > the websites that put up fake versions of OpenOffice, the ones that > lead to users coming to us later complaining about how their systems > were taken over by adware and browser pop ups. If we simply allow > anyone to use the logos then we have no protection against websites > that imply association or endorsement from this project, and use this > to confuse or lure users. > > > "If you are planning on using an object from this area, you may modify an > > object as you like subject to the following conditions: > > > > (1) Use of any of the logos requires explicit permission. See: > > http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/trademarks.html > > > > Could we just link this back to the trademark page? We already say > there that using the logos requires explicit permission. Yes, but I think people are getting confused about what the logos are...this was kind of my point here. > We also give > other useful information on how to request, etc. It would be good to > keep that info all in one place. > > > (2) Please note the licensing conditions for any other object you want to > > use (either LGPL or PDL) > > > > (3) If the object is licensed with LGPL > > (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html) license, you may modify it as > you > > like but should cite Apache OpenOffice (formerly OpenOffice.org) as the > > provider of the original artwork on which your modification is based > > > > (3) If the object is licensed PDL > > (http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html), you may modify the > object as > > you desire but must make you modification publicly available. > > > > --- end of items --- > > > > We seem to be getting many folks interested in using our artwork in > various > > forms lately. We still have the "Distribution FAQ" on cwiki barely > started, > > but it would be very helpful if we could get some of the elements > correctly > > aligned before I can complete that. > > > > I'm not sure we will be able to do much to make the core logos used in > any unrestricted way. The safer way is to develop new logos (like > the "Get it here!") logo, that are thematically related, but distinct > from the official project logos, and then to promote the new logos for > use in certain situations. > > Going back to what a trademark is: it gives legal protection for > symbols that indicate the source of goods and services. If we allow > the logo to be used by others for materials that they (not us) > produce, then we can lose any legal protections offered by the > trademark. > > Following that idea, for distribution, one thing we could do is > publish our own CD artwork, maybe based on Drew's designs (assuming he > is willing) and then with our official Releases we could include an > ISO image and the artwork. We could then state that anyone is welcome > to burn the ISO image to CD, unmodified, and distribute, for free or > for charge, CD's with that artwork on it. The trademark use then does > indicate the source of the goods, since it is unmodified AOO, per the > ISO image we created. This protects the user as well. It also makes > it easier for the distributor. If they want to include other files, > templates, etc., then they could include a 2nd CD, but this one would > not include our logos. > Well this is one of those weird areas. The other artwork we have out there has licenses that indicate folks can indeed modify them -- the artwork. I would LOVE if Drew would contribute his artwork. The artwork itself might be licensed with ALv2, I guess? or not...this is really the crux of what we need to make easier for users. If everyone feels its already as simple as it can be, well that's OK too. > > -Rob > > > > > - - > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > MzK > > > > "There's no crying in baseball!" > > -- Jimmy Dugan (Tom Hanks), "A League of Their Own" > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MzK "There's no crying in baseball!" -- Jimmy Dugan (Tom Hanks), "A League of Their Own"
