8:21 a.m.
We have a policy for possibly delegating trademark approval to various
SIGs. <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_approval_policy>;. I'd
like to update "SIG" to read something like "SIG, Working Group, or
other Fedora committee or team". Any objections?
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
8:24 a.m.
On 05/07/2015 09:21 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
We have a policy for possibly delegating trademark approval to
various
SIGs. <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_approval_policy>;. I'd
like to update "SIG" to read something like "SIG, Working Group, or
other Fedora committee or team". Any objections?
I'd like there to be some sort of Fedora Legal veto in there. I don't
anticipate ever having to use it, but I don't want anyone to think it
doesn't exist.
~tom
==
Red Hat
8:50 a.m.
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:24:07AM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> We have a policy for possibly delegating trademark approval to
various
> SIGs. <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_approval_policy>;. I'd
> like to update "SIG" to read something like "SIG, Working Group, or
> other Fedora committee or team". Any objections?
I'd like there to be some sort of Fedora Legal veto in there. I don't
anticipate ever having to use it, but I don't want anyone to think it
doesn't exist.
That seems basically reasonable. Wouldn't, however, that be a part of
<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines>? It
actually does not seem to be; currently, that document says approval is
granted by the Council without any mention of a separate veto.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
8:55 a.m.
On 05/07/2015 09:50 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:24:07AM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
>> We have a policy for possibly delegating trademark approval to various
>> SIGs. <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_approval_policy>;. I'd
>> like to update "SIG" to read something like "SIG, Working Group,
or
>> other Fedora committee or team". Any objections?
>
> I'd like there to be some sort of Fedora Legal veto in there. I don't
> anticipate ever having to use it, but I don't want anyone to think it
> doesn't exist.
That seems basically reasonable. Wouldn't, however, that be a part of
<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines>? It
actually does not seem to be; currently, that document says approval is
granted by the Council without any mention of a separate veto.
I think it was implicit that the Council/Board would honor Fedora
Legal's veto. The only reason I bring it up now is because we're
delegating it out to SIGs who may not be aware of that situation.
If you'd rather have me put it in the Trademark_guidelines, I have no
issue with it being there, but I do want to make sure the SIGs are aware
of it.
~tom
==
Red Hat
9:01 a.m.
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:55:25AM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
I think it was implicit that the Council/Board would honor Fedora
Legal's veto. The only reason I bring it up now is because we're
delegating it out to SIGs who may not be aware of that situation.
Before we go too far, note that I was reading the linked policy without
enough coffee and missed that this is really a "SIG gets things inline,
council approves after" policy rather than a "council deligates the
approval decision" policy -- line 3 still includes "submit to Council".
So perhaps this is all moot.
If you'd rather have me put it in the Trademark_guidelines, I
have no
issue with it being there, but I do want to make sure the SIGs are aware
of it.
While I also can't imagine a real situation where the the council would
disregard our own legal here, I think it's better for any veto power to
be clearly documented rather than implicit.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
9:02 a.m.
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Tom Callaway <tcallawa(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 05/07/2015 09:50 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:24:07AM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
>>> We have a policy for possibly delegating trademark approval to various
>>> SIGs. <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_approval_policy>;.
I'd
>>> like to update "SIG" to read something like "SIG, Working
Group, or
>>> other Fedora committee or team". Any objections?
>>
>> I'd like there to be some sort of Fedora Legal veto in there. I don't
>> anticipate ever having to use it, but I don't want anyone to think it
>> doesn't exist.
>
> That seems basically reasonable. Wouldn't, however, that be a part of
> <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines>? It
> actually does not seem to be; currently, that document says approval is
> granted by the Council without any mention of a separate veto.
I think it was implicit that the Council/Board would honor Fedora
Legal's veto. The only reason I bring it up now is because we're
delegating it out to SIGs who may not be aware of that situation.
If you'd rather have me put it in the Trademark_guidelines, I have no
issue with it being there, but I do want to make sure the SIGs are aware
of it.
I'll a bit confused by the goal here. Point 3 in that proposed
approval policy says, "Once approvals from appointed SIGS are done,
the Item will be submitted to the Council (via a ticket) for trademark
approval." So is the SIG really doing the approval or just some
vetting of the request?
John
9:06 a.m.
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:02 AM, inode0 <inode0(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Tom Callaway
<tcallawa(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/07/2015 09:50 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:24:07AM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
>>>> We have a policy for possibly delegating trademark approval to various
>>>> SIGs. <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_approval_policy>;.
I'd
>>>> like to update "SIG" to read something like "SIG, Working
Group, or
>>>> other Fedora committee or team". Any objections?
>>>
>>> I'd like there to be some sort of Fedora Legal veto in there. I
don't
>>> anticipate ever having to use it, but I don't want anyone to think it
>>> doesn't exist.
>>
>> That seems basically reasonable. Wouldn't, however, that be a part of
>> <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines>? It
>> actually does not seem to be; currently, that document says approval is
>> granted by the Council without any mention of a separate veto.
>
> I think it was implicit that the Council/Board would honor Fedora
> Legal's veto. The only reason I bring it up now is because we're
> delegating it out to SIGs who may not be aware of that situation.
>
> If you'd rather have me put it in the Trademark_guidelines, I have no
> issue with it being there, but I do want to make sure the SIGs are aware
> of it.
I'll a bit confused by the goal here. Point 3 in that proposed
approval policy says, "Once approvals from appointed SIGS are done,
the Item will be submitted to the Council (via a ticket) for trademark
approval." So is the SIG really doing the approval or just some
vetting of the request?
Oh good. I'm not the only one confused. As I read it, the SIG is
just doing some of the vetting.
Now, maybe would could still s/SIG/SIG, WG, <whatever> but I don't
think it matters much given that the Council is still the final
approver.
josh
9:08 a.m.
On 05/07/2015 10:06 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
Now, maybe would could still s/SIG/SIG, WG, <whatever> but I
don't
think it matters much given that the Council is still the final
approver.
Yeah, it looks like both me and Matthew misread that. :) Consider my
request withdrawn.
~tom
==
Red Hat
9:11 a.m.
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 10:08:09AM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> Now, maybe would could still s/SIG/SIG, WG, <whatever> but
I don't
> think it matters much given that the Council is still the final
> approver.
Yeah, it looks like both me and Matthew misread that. :) Consider my
request withdrawn.
More coffee all around!
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
9:08 a.m.
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 10:06:01AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Now, maybe would could still s/SIG/SIG, WG, <whatever> but I
don't
think it matters much given that the Council is still the final
approver.
Yeah -- I was absolutely reading way too much into that document. Mea
culpa. However, I'd still like to make that change, and since it is an
officially approved policy wanted to discuss it.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
3270
days inactive
3270
days old
council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org
9 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
inode0 -
Josh Boyer -
Matthew Miller -
Tom Callaway