Re: Wiki text licensing
Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org a écrit: (I changed the Subject because I recommend that we not describe potentially useful works of software documentation works as content. That term denigrates the works. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html@Content for the reason.) I believe the aforementioned URL is incorrect. The correct one would be http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Content. -- Dodji ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Wiki text licensing
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:25:17 +0100 Dodji Seketeli do...@seketeli.org wrote: Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org a écrit: (I changed the Subject because I recommend that we not describe potentially useful works of software documentation works as content. That term denigrates the works. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html@Content for the reason.) I believe the aforementioned URL is incorrect. The correct one would be http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Content. I am slightly confused - is there no intent to relicense and diagrams ? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Stock trademark licensing agreements?
Hi all, In one project I work with I have been trying to convince the project, which has a very traditional all rights reserved trademark policy, that it is worthwhile lowering the bar for certain classes of community activities. My arguments that we should have a broader fair use statement has apparently not gained traction - my next idea is to have a small number of pre-cooked trademark licenses for common activities (like: I want to run a local event, I want to run a fan website, I want to get some merchandise printed) and have these on the website so that all concerned are aware up front what the expectations are when you do these things, and to give very simple click-through agreements to lower the overhead of dealing with things like these. A community website, for example, might have a guideline that there be a clear disclaimer that the site is not official, and that content on the site does not adversely affect the reputation of the project. A community event license might have guidelines for event naming, visual identity, etc. This was the idea behind the GNOME user group agreement. Has anyone else done anything similar? Did it help the community feel more control over the project brand? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Stock trademark licensing agreements?
Le mercredi 16 mars 2011, à 16:06 +0100, Dave Neary a écrit : [...] This was the idea behind the GNOME user group agreement. Has anyone else done anything similar? Did it help the community feel more control over the project brand? openSUSE has trademark guidelines: http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Trademark_guidelines The guidelines explicitly authorizes some common uses for the openSUSE trademark, with no form to fill. They're being improved right now, and the latest draft can be seen at: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-project/2011-03/msg00321.html I do believe it did help the community feel more control, yes. Of course, that's a bit different than in the GNOME case: the general feeling before those guidelines was that the trademark was completely controlled by Novell (who owned it) -- and we can't simply compare a company with lawyers, like Novell, to the GNOME Foundation. But it did help :-) Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Stock trademark licensing agreements?
Hi, Vincent Untz wrote: openSUSE has trademark guidelines: http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Trademark_guidelines The guidelines explicitly authorizes some common uses for the openSUSE trademark, with no form to fill. Good guidelines for what the holder is OK with are great - but not quite what I was hoping for. I'm thinking more along the lines of http://foundation.gnome.org/licensing/usergroup/ This is stuff which falls outside of the normal guidelines, that we won't let everyone do, but which we're happy for some people to do, under certain conditions. By giving a license, we deal with the Trademark law requires you to police your mark constraint, while also allowing people to do stuff we're OK with without putting too many barriers in their way. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
