Re: proposal to change GNOME's trademark guidelines

[Alan Cox <alan lxorguk ukuu org uk>]

> This section is quite broad, and is only modified by the somewhat vague
> "Fair Use" section. Unfortunately, if taken literally, it would prevent

The "Fair Use" section has another problem btw when someone is looking at
this. "Fair Use" has no meaning in most legal systems outside the USA.

> I'm proposing this additional language (which is based on text in other
> free software trademark policies) to be added in the same section, after
> that paragraph:

And that should be reviewed by someone experienced in trademark
law. I'm sure some of the corporate members can help. I know how much fun
Red Hat had trying to get the Fedora mark right.

> > This requirement is waived in all contexts where such marks are not
> > normally included, such as email, online discussion, package names,
> > non-graphical advertisements (when permitted), and academic papers.
> > We encourage the use of the symbol whenever possible, but recognize
> > that many non-commercial and informal uses will omit it.

This for example allows the use of "gnome" for packages which are not
gnome packages or to advertise products that are nothing to do with
Gnome using google adwords (eg buying the Gnome word and pointing it at
xfce.org 8)). Careless, and why a lawyer should be involved in such work
because once you've trashed your trademark it's near impossible to undo
the damage.

> We want to make sure that people can use GNOME software and talk about it
> freely without unreasonable restrictions. The aim is to adopt this
> amendment to the policy in two weeks if there are no objections. Public
> discussion here about it would be great, and folks can contact me
> privately too if they want to.

This seems the wrong tack to me. Giving clear examples of fair use, and
clear, tight ones so you don't make the package mistake would sort this
out. Trademark requirements are quite specific and defining some examples
would provide clarity and assurance surely ?

It's really essential such changes go through lawyers. Sad the world
works that way but in the case of trademark that's how it happens to be.

Alan