Re: gnome-logos package

Hi Luis:

IMO there may be yet another option, i.e. the 'Debian' route, where we have one logo package (the default?) that's not trademarked (though IMO the 'GNOME' name should remain trademarked), and one, downloadable from, which is trademarked and therefore (perhaps ironically) not part of the "community" packages.

Whether this is desirable probably depends on who you ask, but at least it would have the opt in/opt out approach; users and distros could vote with their, uh, well you know what I mean...


Luis Villa wrote:

Trademark law doesn't give us the flexibility we want, which leaves us
with options (as I see it) that are basically:

* pursue the Mozilla route (strong trademark), which I feel will
alienate our contributors and completely violate the implied social
contract which the GPL has created around our shared community goods
(i.e., compare/contrast how we license our code and the foot- which
should be more important? why would we choose to license one more
liberally than the other?)

* collaborate with our lawyers to create and pursue a completely
novel/untested/potentially completely undefensible license that uses a
novel legal approach to give the community flexible rights without (I
have approached one other free software group about collaborating
along these lines but it hasn't really gone anywhere, unfortunately)

* give up the legally enforceable mark and use a political party
approach- accept that there will be some uses we don't like and can't
control, but use the mechanisms of party (speech, platform creation,
etc.) to control the mark as much as possible outside of traditional
trademark law.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]