stabus report/slight rant time now -- it looks long but please read :)
1) Blocking on release forms. I'm assured RH Legal is working on it. In the meantime if you're willing to take photos of people and have their contact information so you can hunt them down with a New and Improved Release Form then there's no reason stopping you; you just can't upload them to the wiki yet.
2) As far as I'm concerned we'll be using Lightning Source Inc. (LSI) for publishing. It'll be on-demand, woo. We've yet to make a decision on whether to print color or grayscale pages, and what page size we want (I think I'm leaning towards 8.5" square). Any objectors should reply to this email.
3) I have no clue how we're getting initial funding. I made some original contacts with gregdek and spevack but I'm so confused about it. Somebody who knows what they're talking about with relation to this (community architecture, etc) please reply to this message or to me personally.
4) The original plan of publishing four of these books at the very start seems to be getting... less and less feasible per day. Right now I'm at the idea of publishing one, 80-page book and selling that. We can get at least 200 photos in there (more than one per page). Understanding that we got about 20 or so photos from the wonderful Mo Duffy at FUDConF11, this will make the target much more feasible.
5) We've got a great number of volunteers on our wiki page[1] but we could still use more regional photographers. Keep in mind that if you own a nice camera (generally a D-SLR) and you might have extra time we'd absolutely love you to volunteer as a regional photographer.
6) Does anybody know what we do to convert bitmap images to CMYK with free software?
7) Are there any currently unanswered questions people have?
[1]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Picture_book
On Sat Feb 21 2009 05:25:56 GMT+0100 (CET) Ian Weller wrote:
- Does anybody know what we do to convert bitmap images to CMYK with free software?
Ever tried Cinepaint? Here's a Tutorial: http://www.behrmann.name/cms/cinepaint/bildbearbeitung/cinepaint_ccorrection...
HTH, Felix
I have an Image of my Guitar Headstock. The headstock has the Fedora Logo on it. Would it be ok to submit that.
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Felix Kaechele felix@fetzig.org wrote:
On Sat Feb 21 2009 05:25:56 GMT+0100 (CET) Ian Weller wrote:
- Does anybody know what we do to convert bitmap images to CMYK with
free software?
Ever tried Cinepaint? Here's a Tutorial: http://www.behrmann.name/cms/cinepaint/bildbearbeitung/cinepaint_ccorrection...
HTH, Felix
-- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 09:47:00AM +0000, Keiran Smith wrote:
I have an Image of my Guitar Headstock. The headstock has the Fedora Logo on it. Would it be ok to submit that.
I don't see why not, once we start accepting uploads.
Ian Weller wrote:
stabus report/slight rant time now -- it looks long but please read :)
- Blocking on release forms. I'm assured RH Legal is working on it. In the meantime if you're willing to take photos of people and have their contact information so you can hunt them down with a New and Improved Release Form then there's no reason stopping you; you just can't upload them to the wiki yet.
I am sorry to say this, but I feel this process is kind of bogus. One thing we learned from FOSS is that license proliferation is a bad thing and on the same line of thought, why Release Forms proliferation would be a good thing? Using the NIH syndrome is not in the FOSS spirit.
Is hard for me to understand what is the problem if I get a generic release form for "any media and any purpose" and contribute it under CLA and an accepted license.
- As far as I'm concerned we'll be using Lightning Source Inc. (LSI) for publishing. It'll be on-demand, woo. We've yet to make a decision on whether to print color or grayscale pages, and what page size we want (I think I'm leaning towards 8.5" square). Any objectors should reply to this email.
The decision about colors and page size would be in direct relation with the next point, initial funding.
- I have no clue how we're getting initial funding. I made some original contacts with gregdek and spevack but I'm so confused about it. Somebody who knows what they're talking about with relation to this (community architecture, etc) please reply to this message or to me personally.
Which is the amount of money needed?
I am sure that if we can put together a god looking PDF format of the book it would be easier to get help with the funding.
- The original plan of publishing four of these books at the very start seems to be getting... less and less feasible per day. Right now I'm at the idea of publishing one, 80-page book and selling that. We can get at least 200 photos in there (more than one per page). Understanding that we got about 20 or so photos from the wonderful Mo Duffy at FUDConF11, this will make the target much more feasible.
Count on at least the same amount from various photographers at the Brno FUDCon.
- We've got a great number of volunteers on our wiki page[1] but we could still use more regional photographers. Keep in mind that if you own a nice camera (generally a D-SLR) and you might have extra time we'd absolutely love you to volunteer as a regional photographer.
I think we can count on at least 4 or 5 photographers in EU and a couple from India, just launch the project...
- Does anybody know what we do to convert bitmap images to CMYK with free software?
I don't have first hand experience with this, but from what I understand Scribus is all we need - http://wiki.scribus.net/index.php/Category:HOWTO
- Are there any currently unanswered questions people have?
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:53:13AM +0200, Nicu Buculei wrote:
Ian Weller wrote:
stabus report/slight rant time now -- it looks long but please read :)
- Blocking on release forms. I'm assured RH Legal is working on it. In the meantime if you're willing to take photos of people and have their contact information so you can hunt them down with a New and Improved Release Form then there's no reason stopping you; you just can't upload them to the wiki yet.
I am sorry to say this, but I feel this process is kind of bogus. One thing we learned from FOSS is that license proliferation is a bad thing and on the same line of thought, why Release Forms proliferation would be a good thing? Using the NIH syndrome is not in the FOSS spirit.
Is hard for me to understand what is the problem if I get a generic release form for "any media and any purpose" and contribute it under CLA and an accepted license.
I have been told that we must wait on release forms from RH Legal before we upload pictures to the wiki. The temporary release forms we got from spot for FUDCon were for that specific FUDCon only -- also what I've been told.
I hate to see how we're mostly blocking on this too for pictorial content but as Paul said later down this thread they're getting on Legal. I trust that they'll have them done soon.
I also agree that a generic release form under the CLA would be wonderous. However I am not The Powers That Be. :)
Ian Weller wrote:
I have been told that we must wait on release forms from RH Legal before we upload pictures to the wiki. The temporary release forms we got from spot for FUDCon were for that specific FUDCon only -- also what I've been told.
Max or anyone else,
Can anyone confirm and/or deny that this is the reality of the situation. Otherwise, we should go ahead and start setting up the mechanisms for people to upload while we wait.
Jack
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 07:00:20PM -0500, Jack Aboutboul wrote:
Ian Weller wrote:
I have been told that we must wait on release forms from RH Legal before we upload pictures to the wiki. The temporary release forms we got from spot for FUDCon were for that specific FUDCon only -- also what I've been told.
Max or anyone else,
Can anyone confirm and/or deny that this is the reality of the situation. Otherwise, we should go ahead and start setting up the mechanisms for people to upload while we wait.
I pinged spot on IRC but he hasn't responded yet.
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 07:00:20PM -0500, Jack Aboutboul wrote:
Ian Weller wrote:
I have been told that we must wait on release forms from RH Legal before we upload pictures to the wiki. The temporary release forms we got from spot for FUDCon were for that specific FUDCon only -- also what I've been told.
Max or anyone else,
Can anyone confirm and/or deny that this is the reality of the situation. Otherwise, we should go ahead and start setting up the mechanisms for people to upload while we wait.
Yes, it's correct.
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Ian Weller wrote:
- I have no clue how we're getting initial funding. I made some
original contacts with gregdek and spevack but I'm so confused about it. Somebody who knows what they're talking about with relation to this (community architecture, etc) please reply to this message or to me personally.
CommArch is happy to provide the initial funding. I think the first estimate was under $3k, if I remember correctly? I'm trying to finalize my team's Q1 budget in the next week, and I'd like to earmark funds for the picture book in that budget allocation. If there's an updated estimate, please let me know.
- Are there any currently unanswered questions people have?
More thoughts later -- I have a meeting in a few minutes.
--Max
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:25:56PM -0600, Ian Weller wrote:
stabus report/slight rant time now -- it looks long but please read :)
- Blocking on release forms. I'm assured RH Legal is working on it. In the meantime if you're willing to take photos of people and have their contact information so you can hunt them down with a New and Improved Release Form then there's no reason stopping you; you just can't upload them to the wiki yet.
Yup, Spot and I are keeping after Legal -- they are working on a number of issues for us and this is but one of them. This shouldn't need to be a blocker on most of the project, but I definitely understand that until we have these forms we may be at a standstill for the actual pictorial content.
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Ian Weller wrote:
- Blocking on release forms. I'm assured RH Legal is working on it.
In the meantime if you're willing to take photos of people and have their contact information so you can hunt them down with a New and Improved Release Form then there's no reason stopping you; you just can't upload them to the wiki yet.
I said this to Jack on the phone yesterday, and I'll repeat it here. Let's route around this. You could conceivably layout an entire book with stubs of certain photos that you want in certain places without actually having any of those photos. Selecting the actual photo and getting a release form could be the *last* thing that we do and doesn't have to be the first.
I say let's move this project ahead. Jack, do we have a roadmap for all the things that are needed to make this project happen yet? Let's get it up on the wiki page and then work off of it.
"When doubts abound, route around!"
--Max
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 04:32:50PM +0100, Max Spevack wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Ian Weller wrote:
- Blocking on release forms. I'm assured RH Legal is working on it.
In the meantime if you're willing to take photos of people and have their contact information so you can hunt them down with a New and Improved Release Form then there's no reason stopping you; you just can't upload them to the wiki yet.
I said this to Jack on the phone yesterday, and I'll repeat it here. Let's route around this. You could conceivably layout an entire book with stubs of certain photos that you want in certain places without actually having any of those photos. Selecting the actual photo and getting a release form could be the *last* thing that we do and doesn't have to be the first.
Sounds good.
If anybody has any mockups they wanna go for, please submit them. Or any ideas at all for page design. I'm all ears :D
I say let's move this project ahead. Jack, do we have a roadmap for all the things that are needed to make this project happen yet? Let's get it up on the wiki page and then work off of it.
I've got a roadmap in my head somewhere without any dates on it. From what I've learned in the past few months on this list, here's what I envision, in some sort of vague order:
* Approve mockup of page designs * Compile images and stories * Place images and stories in book * Proof stories for typography and content * Pressure FPL to write foreword * Approve photo placement * Create index of people in back * Other last-minute checks * CMYK-ify PDFs * Publish * ??? * Profit!
No way in hell we're getting this done by F11 so F12 Beta is my target for being published right now.
Ian Weller wrote:
If anybody has any mockups they wanna go for, please submit them. Or any ideas at all for page design. I'm all ears :D
Start with the final decision about page size and also get a decision about black and white versus full color.
No way in hell we're getting this done by F11 so F12 Beta is my target for being published right now.
That is a long time... but I believe the milestone for collecting images is soon enough so we can count on photos from the Berlin FUDCon (late June)
Nicu Buculei wrote:
Ian Weller wrote:
If anybody has any mockups they wanna go for, please submit them. Or any ideas at all for page design. I'm all ears :D
Start with the final decision about page size and also get a decision about black and white versus full color.
It has to be full color. I don't think B&W will do us justice...
Jack
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 09:38:34AM +0200, Nicu Buculei wrote:
Ian Weller wrote:
If anybody has any mockups they wanna go for, please submit them. Or any ideas at all for page design. I'm all ears :D
Start with the final decision about page size and also get a decision about black and white versus full color.
I realized that in the shower this morning. I need to look at my email when I made a huge listing of what we could get from LSI. (I'd also need to find it. Blugh.)
All of the PDFs I got from LSI via Doug Berry are stored here: http://ianweller.fedorapeople.org/lsi-docs/ It mentions that we can get a color-interior paperback at the size 8.5" by 8.5". I can't quite remember my cost estimate but it's somewhere in the archives for this list. Are there any objections whatsoever to having a paperback book of this size and a color interior?
In related news, last call for suggestions on any other publishing companies or any other things that LSI now offers.
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 05:08:55PM -0600, Ian Weller wrote:
I've got a roadmap in my head somewhere without any dates on it. From what I've learned in the past few months on this list, here's what I envision, in some sort of vague order:
- Approve mockup of page designs
- Compile images and stories
- Place images and stories in book
- Proof stories for typography and content
- Pressure FPL to write foreword
Heh, very little pressure required -- glad to do it.
- Approve photo placement
- Create index of people in back
- Other last-minute checks
- CMYK-ify PDFs
- Publish
- ???
- Profit!
No way in hell we're getting this done by F11 so F12 Beta is my target for being published right now.
The way I see it, this is very much a team-driven project with a fungible time line. Many teams tend to similarly have two kinds of projects -- those that are release-driven, backed by a repeatable (sometimes improving process, and those that are team-driven and are "done when they're done."
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Ian Weller wrote:
- Approve mockup of page designs
- Compile images and stories
- Place images and stories in book
- Proof stories for typography and content
- Pressure FPL to write foreword
- Approve photo placement
- Create index of people in back
- Other last-minute checks
- CMYK-ify PDFs
- Publish
- ???
- Profit!
My only experience with anything like this is being the editor of my high school's news "magazine" which was about 90 pages long and came out 4 times a year.
We had a layout process that involved having a mockup of every single page that started out as a description of what would be on the page.
Each page had an owner responsible for the content for the page, and the mockup was slowly updated as content came in.
There was a team that made sure that layout felt consistent across the whole thing -- not that every page is exactly the same, but that there's a consistent look and feel.
There was a team that was in charge of editing and finalizing content as it came in, giving the consitent voice to the final product.
What Ian is suggesting feels pretty similar to that.
===
Let's start by drawing a line in the sand of the Meeting on Tuesday March 10th. Where do we want the picture book to be by then?
Let's assume the book is 100 pages. I'd suggest that we have a list that describes every single page in the format given above, from the front cover to the back cover.
===
No way in hell we're getting this done by F11 so F12 Beta is my target for being published right now.
Some of Marketing's deadlines are tied to a release, and some are tied to "whenever they are done". This is in the latter category.
--Max
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Max Spevack wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Ian Weller wrote:
- Approve mockup of page designs
- Compile images and stories
- Place images and stories in book
- Proof stories for typography and content
- Pressure FPL to write foreword
- Approve photo placement
- Create index of people in back
- Other last-minute checks
- CMYK-ify PDFs
- Publish
- ???
- Profit!
My only experience with anything like this is being the editor of my high school's news "magazine" which was about 90 pages long and came out 4 times a year.
We had a layout process that involved having a mockup of every single page that started out as a description of what would be on the page.
Each page had an owner responsible for the content for the page, and the mockup was slowly updated as content came in.
There was a team that made sure that layout felt consistent across the whole thing -- not that every page is exactly the same, but that there's a consistent look and feel.
There was a team that was in charge of editing and finalizing content as it came in, giving the consitent voice to the final product.
What Ian is suggesting feels pretty similar to that.
===
Let's start by drawing a line in the sand of the Meeting on Tuesday March 10th. Where do we want the picture book to be by then?
Let's assume the book is 100 pages. I'd suggest that we have a list that describes every single page in the format given above, from the front cover to the back cover.
===
No way in hell we're getting this done by F11 so F12 Beta is my target for being published right now.
Some of Marketing's deadlines are tied to a release, and some are tied to "whenever they are done". This is in the latter category.
So back in my undergraduate days, I did *exactly this job* for NCSU periodicals. I produced the John Donne Journal (http://english.chass.ncsu.edu/jdj/) for a number of years.
We used Pagemaker for layout. Can I presume that we will be using Scribus?
--g
-- Got an XO that you're not using? Loan it to a needy developer! [[ http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XO_Exchange_Registry ]]
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 03:05:25PM -0500, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote:
So back in my undergraduate days, I did *exactly this job* for NCSU periodicals. I produced the John Donne Journal (http://english.chass.ncsu.edu/jdj/) for a number of years.
We used Pagemaker for layout. Can I presume that we will be using Scribus?
Yes. But anything that is done in Inkscape or high-res enough in the GIMP can easily be imported in so no worries about using those for mockups right now.
On 2009-02-20 at 23:25:56 -0500, Ian Weller ianweller@gmail.com wrote:
stabus report/slight rant time now -- it looks long but please read :)
- Blocking on release forms. I'm assured RH Legal is working on it. In the meantime if you're willing to take photos of people and have their contact information so you can hunt them down with a New and Improved Release Form then there's no reason stopping you; you just can't upload them to the wiki yet.
Okay, here is the release form: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/Model%20and%20Contribution%20Release.pdf
(I tried to attach it, but it was too big for mailman)
Please note that the model (person in the picture, person giving quotes) signs the top part, and the Photographer (person who took the picture and holds copyright on it) signs the bottom part. Also, please note that the model needs to be 18 or older.
Right now, we have no mechanism to track this electronically, so its old fashioned paper and pen. Pick someone to receive them all and keep them in a folder.
Questions? Comments?
~spot
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 01:32:42PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
Okay, here is the release form: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/Model%20and%20Contribution%20Release.pdf
Questions? Comments?
It feels too much like giving away my rights perpetually. Also, why does this have to be an "exclusive" agreement?
I agree with Chuck.
Although I was easily able to sign the model release I received at FudCon because it was releasing the image I gave, the Red Hat lawyers seem to want perpetual license to use all aspects of my likeness for marketing purposes, and MIT, my employer will not permit that.
MIT does not get involved in the marketing of products, and if my face and title were used in certain contexts, it would conflict with my employer's strictures on MIT marketing.
-Bill
On Feb 26, 2009, at 2:07 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 01:32:42PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
Okay, here is the release form: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/Model%20and%20Contribution%20Release.pdf
Questions? Comments?
It feels too much like giving away my rights perpetually. Also, why does this have to be an "exclusive" agreement?
-- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
On 2009-02-26 at 14:13:36 -0500, William Cattey wdc@MIT.EDU wrote:
I agree with Chuck.
Although I was easily able to sign the model release I received at FudCon because it was releasing the image I gave, the Red Hat lawyers seem to want perpetual license to use all aspects of my likeness for marketing purposes, and MIT, my employer will not permit that.
MIT does not get involved in the marketing of products, and if my face and title were used in certain contexts, it would conflict with my employer's strictures on MIT marketing.
These are very valid points. Red Hat Legal was able to quickly turn around a new version of this document for us, please look at:
http://spot.fedorapeople.org/Model%20and%20Contribution%20Release%20rev1.pdf
It is no longer an "exclusive" agreement, and it is now bounded to the Fedora Picture Book only.
Please let me know if there are any additional concerns, Red Hat is more than willing to work with our needs here.
Thanks,
~spot
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 04:38:41PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 2009-02-26 at 14:13:36 -0500, William Cattey wdc@MIT.EDU wrote:
I agree with Chuck.
Although I was easily able to sign the model release I received at FudCon because it was releasing the image I gave, the Red Hat lawyers seem to want perpetual license to use all aspects of my likeness for marketing purposes, and MIT, my employer will not permit that.
MIT does not get involved in the marketing of products, and if my face and title were used in certain contexts, it would conflict with my employer's strictures on MIT marketing.
These are very valid points. Red Hat Legal was able to quickly turn around a new version of this document for us, please look at:
http://spot.fedorapeople.org/Model%20and%20Contribution%20Release%20rev1.pdf
It is no longer an "exclusive" agreement, and it is now bounded to the Fedora Picture Book only.
Please let me know if there are any additional concerns, Red Hat is more than willing to work with our needs here.
I see no concerns. I talked with Spot about adding a field for the name of the image on the wiki and he added that.
The final version of the release form is at https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/2/2c/Picture_book_release_form.pdf If you still see any problems with it please let me know.
(ccing spot so he can remember to remove the PDFs from his fedorapeople)
Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
These are very valid points. Red Hat Legal was able to quickly turn around a new version of this document for us, please look at:
http://spot.fedorapeople.org/Model%20and%20Contribution%20Release%20rev1.pdf
It is no longer an "exclusive" agreement, and it is now bounded to the Fedora Picture Book only.
Thanks a lot for the modification, in the past we wanted to use people photos for the website too, but have not pursued it due to lack of release forms. However, the test still says "for the Fedora Picture Book", which *is* bound to the Picture Book only.
Please let me know if there are any additional concerns, Red Hat is more than willing to work with our needs here.
Some people expressed the concern about people under 18 years, it appears we have some such contributors. For them the form should have also a place where the legal guardian will sign.
Also, I would like a (as official as possible) statement about how the form can be sent: is OK if I receive it faxed by the model, sign it as a photographer and then fax to Red Hat? but printing/signing/scanning/emailing?
Nicu Buculei wrote:
Some people expressed the concern about people under 18 years, it appears we have some such contributors. For them the form should have also a place where the legal guardian will sign.
I'll ask about this. The age restriction was added because contracts signed by individuals under the age of consent are generally unenforceable. (18 isn't the age of consent everywhere, but its a safe number to use)
Also, I would like a (as official as possible) statement about how the form can be sent: is OK if I receive it faxed by the model, sign it as a photographer and then fax to Red Hat? but printing/signing/scanning/emailing?
As long as it ends up signed and in a physical folder somewhere, it does not matter. I leave it up to Ian to determine who will collect these things.
~spot
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:11:05AM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
Nicu Buculei wrote:
Also, I would like a (as official as possible) statement about how the form can be sent: is OK if I receive it faxed by the model, sign it as a photographer and then fax to Red Hat? but printing/signing/scanning/emailing?
As long as it ends up signed and in a physical folder somewhere, it does not matter. I leave it up to Ian to determine who will collect these things.
Mo Duffy at BOS is keeping all of them. I'm setting up people internationally to collect these and get them to her as well. I'll contact her (and a few others as well) about fax numbers or where one can email scanned versions of them.
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 04:38:41PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 2009-02-26 at 14:13:36 -0500, William Cattey wdc@MIT.EDU wrote:
I agree with Chuck.
Although I was easily able to sign the model release I received at FudCon because it was releasing the image I gave, the Red Hat lawyers seem to want perpetual license to use all aspects of my likeness for marketing purposes, and MIT, my employer will not permit that.
MIT does not get involved in the marketing of products, and if my face and title were used in certain contexts, it would conflict with my employer's strictures on MIT marketing.
These are very valid points. Red Hat Legal was able to quickly turn around a new version of this document for us, please look at:
http://spot.fedorapeople.org/Model%20and%20Contribution%20Release%20rev1.pdf
It is no longer an "exclusive" agreement, and it is now bounded to the Fedora Picture Book only.
Please let me know if there are any additional concerns, Red Hat is more than willing to work with our needs here.
Thanks for shepherding this along, Spot.
I'm coming into this a bit late, but I couldn't help but wonder if there was any discussion with Red Hat legal concerning inserting a choice of law and choice of forum clause in the Model and Contribution release. By adding these clauses, the signee would agree to litigate the issue by the specified law (New York, Delaware, etc.) and location (presumably most easily accessible for Red Hat/Fedora legal department). I would be happy to whip something together and pass it along. (Disclosure: I am an attorney licensed to practice in Michigan).
--Mike On Feb 27, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 04:38:41PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 2009-02-26 at 14:13:36 -0500, William Cattey wdc@MIT.EDU wrote:
I agree with Chuck.
Although I was easily able to sign the model release I received at FudCon because it was releasing the image I gave, the Red Hat lawyers seem to want perpetual license to use all aspects of my likeness for marketing purposes, and MIT, my employer will not permit that.
MIT does not get involved in the marketing of products, and if my face and title were used in certain contexts, it would conflict with my employer's strictures on MIT marketing.
These are very valid points. Red Hat Legal was able to quickly turn around a new version of this document for us, please look at:
http://spot.fedorapeople.org/Model%20and%20Contribution%20Release%20rev1.pdf
It is no longer an "exclusive" agreement, and it is now bounded to the Fedora Picture Book only.
Please let me know if there are any additional concerns, Red Hat is more than willing to work with our needs here.
Thanks for shepherding this along, Spot.
-- Paul W. Frields http:// paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
Michael Naughton wrote:
I'm coming into this a bit late, but I couldn't help but wonder if there was any discussion with Red Hat legal concerning inserting a choice of law and choice of forum clause in the Model and Contribution release. By adding these clauses, the signee would agree to litigate the issue by the specified law (New York, Delaware, etc.) and location (presumably most easily accessible for Red Hat/Fedora legal department). I would be happy to whip something together and pass it along. (Disclosure: I am an attorney licensed to practice in Michigan).
I am a potential photographer living in the Europe, the people posing for me will be most likely from the EU, what do we should care about states in the USA?
Nicu:
Frankly, companies usually use clauses like this to dissuade individuals from suing them. Effectively, by signing the document the company and individual agree to the location of any possible lawsuit and what type of law that is to be applied. In the United States each state has its own law. Some states' law is more favorable for certain positions than others. For example, many corporations use Delaware as their state of incorporation because it is seen as having a body of state law that is more corporation friendly.
--Mike Nicu Buculei wrote:
Michael Naughton wrote:
I'm coming into this a bit late, but I couldn't help but wonder if there was any discussion with Red Hat legal concerning inserting a choice of law and choice of forum clause in the Model and Contribution release. By adding these clauses, the signee would agree to litigate the issue by the specified law (New York, Delaware, etc.) and location (presumably most easily accessible for Red Hat/Fedora legal department). I would be happy to whip something together and pass it along. (Disclosure: I am an attorney licensed to practice in Michigan).
I am a potential photographer living in the Europe, the people posing for me will be most likely from the EU, what do we should care about states in the USA?
Michael Naughton wrote:
Nicu:
Frankly, companies usually use clauses like this to dissuade individuals from suing them. Effectively, by signing the document the company and individual agree to the location of any possible lawsuit and what type of law that is to be applied. In the United States each state has its own law. Some states' law is more favorable for certain positions than others. For example, many corporations use Delaware as their state of incorporation because it is seen as having a body of state law that is more corporation friendly.
Mike,
I fully understand that, but I am living in the EU and most likely will never get into Delaware, so the chances of me going into Delaware to sue Red Hat are ZERO. And why I would prefer a corporate-friendly law in Delaware instead of a citizen-friendly law from Europe?
And I guess I can claim at any time that not being a native English speaker (even more, not having *ever* learned English formally) I didn;t fully understood what I signed. You know, a citizen-friendly European law may be helpful here :p
Nicu Buculei wrote:
Michael Naughton wrote:
I'm coming into this a bit late, but I couldn't help but wonder if there was any discussion with Red Hat legal concerning inserting a choice of law and choice of forum clause in the Model and Contribution release. By adding these clauses, the signee would agree to litigate the issue by the specified law (New York, Delaware, etc.) and location (presumably most easily accessible for Red Hat/Fedora legal department). I would be happy to whip something together and pass it along. (Disclosure: I am an attorney licensed to practice in Michigan).
I am a potential photographer living in the Europe, the people posing for me will be most likely from the EU, what do we should care about states in the USA?
Hi Nicu:
This is a great point. I may be coming at this from a very lawyerly perspective. I hope you will forgive me.
Typically, when I am looking at a document for a entity whose position I am supporting I try to think of ways of how that entity might get into legal trouble. In this situation, I looked at the proposed agreement and thought that it might be a problem for Red Hat and Fedora to expose itself to law suits in multiple locations around the world from people contesting the use of their photos. This would be very expensive and time consuming for Red Hat and Fedora as they may have to hire lawyers in Germany, U.K., Romania, United States, etc. for legal claims that come up. My suggestion is to limit the locations that Red Hat and Fedora would have to go to fight such law suits.
On the other hand, I see your point. This is a service that people from around the world will be using. Having portions in an agreement that limit photographers to bring legal issues against Red Hat or Fedora only in the United States may make the agreement less appealing for people to agree to. Individuals like you who want to make a positive contribution might be less willing to sign the agreement knowing this.
Ultimately, I don't think the clauses are necessary. I think the odds of there being a serious lawsuit about this is very small and I don't think there are going to be multiple claims arising out of a release. The agreement is pretty standard and straightforward.
--Mike
Nicu Buculei wrote:
Michael Naughton wrote:
Nicu:
Frankly, companies usually use clauses like this to dissuade individuals from suing them. Effectively, by signing the document the company and individual agree to the location of any possible lawsuit and what type of law that is to be applied. In the United States each state has its own law. Some states' law is more favorable for certain positions than others. For example, many corporations use Delaware as their state of incorporation because it is seen as having a body of state law that is more corporation friendly.
Mike,
I fully understand that, but I am living in the EU and most likely will never get into Delaware, so the chances of me going into Delaware to sue Red Hat are ZERO. And why I would prefer a corporate-friendly law in Delaware instead of a citizen-friendly law from Europe?
And I guess I can claim at any time that not being a native English speaker (even more, not having *ever* learned English formally) I didn;t fully understood what I signed. You know, a citizen-friendly European law may be helpful here :p
Nicu Buculei wrote:
Michael Naughton wrote:
I'm coming into this a bit late, but I couldn't help but wonder if there was any discussion with Red Hat legal concerning inserting a choice of law and choice of forum clause in the Model and Contribution release. By adding these clauses, the signee would agree to litigate the issue by the specified law (New York, Delaware, etc.) and location (presumably most easily accessible for Red Hat/Fedora legal department). I would be happy to whip something together and pass it along. (Disclosure: I am an attorney licensed to practice in Michigan).
I am a potential photographer living in the Europe, the people posing for me will be most likely from the EU, what do we should care about states in the USA?
Nicu,
Whatever, none of this applies to you, I don't think. Either way, we are going to go ahead and set something up so people can start uploading pictures and just continue from there...
Jack
Nicu Buculei wrote:
Michael Naughton wrote:
Nicu:
Frankly, companies usually use clauses like this to dissuade individuals from suing them. Effectively, by signing the document the company and individual agree to the location of any possible lawsuit and what type of law that is to be applied. In the United States each state has its own law. Some states' law is more favorable for certain positions than others. For example, many corporations use Delaware as their state of incorporation because it is seen as having a body of state law that is more corporation friendly.
Mike,
I fully understand that, but I am living in the EU and most likely will never get into Delaware, so the chances of me going into Delaware to sue Red Hat are ZERO. And why I would prefer a corporate-friendly law in Delaware instead of a citizen-friendly law from Europe?
And I guess I can claim at any time that not being a native English speaker (even more, not having *ever* learned English formally) I didn;t fully understood what I signed. You know, a citizen-friendly European law may be helpful here :p
Nicu Buculei wrote:
Michael Naughton wrote:
I'm coming into this a bit late, but I couldn't help but wonder if there was any discussion with Red Hat legal concerning inserting a choice of law and choice of forum clause in the Model and Contribution release. By adding these clauses, the signee would agree to litigate the issue by the specified law (New York, Delaware, etc.) and location (presumably most easily accessible for Red Hat/Fedora legal department). I would be happy to whip something together and pass it along. (Disclosure: I am an attorney licensed to practice in Michigan).
I am a potential photographer living in the Europe, the people posing for me will be most likely from the EU, what do we should care about states in the USA?
Jack Aboutboul wrote:
Nicu,
Whatever, none of this applies to you, I don't think. Either way, we are going to go ahead and set something up so people can start uploading pictures and just continue from there...
Sure, we should start accepting images ASAP (I think we now are waiting for Ian to come with uploading instructions). I was trying just to not get overboard with legalese (we already waited 2 months for the Release Forms). Keep It Simple, Stupid.
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 05:40:51PM +0200, Nicu Buculei wrote:
Sure, we should start accepting images ASAP (I think we now are waiting for Ian to come with uploading instructions). I was trying just to not get overboard with legalese (we already waited 2 months for the Release Forms). Keep It Simple, Stupid.
I need people like Nicu to look over the current uploading instructions and see if they contain all the necessary details. Please don't upload photos yet, though.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Picture_book#Submitting_your_image
Michael Beckwith is working on an image to announce that we're accepting images. I'm hoping to flood planet.fp.o as well when we do this, hopefully by Friday.
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 05:13:53PM -0600, Ian Weller wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 05:40:51PM +0200, Nicu Buculei wrote:
Sure, we should start accepting images ASAP (I think we now are waiting for Ian to come with uploading instructions). I was trying just to not get overboard with legalese (we already waited 2 months for the Release Forms). Keep It Simple, Stupid.
I need people like Nicu to look over the current uploading instructions and see if they contain all the necessary details. Please don't upload photos yet, though.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Picture_book#Submitting_your_image
Michael Beckwith is working on an image to announce that we're accepting images. I'm hoping to flood planet.fp.o as well when we do this, hopefully by Friday.
I'm moving things around. New link: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Submitting_images_for_the_picture_book
Ian Weller wrote:
I need people like Nicu to look over the current uploading instructions and see if they contain all the necessary details. Please don't upload photos yet, though.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Submitting_images_for_the_picture_book
Let me digress a bit: I am not sure if I understood correctly the process with release forms. Supposedly I want to submit a photo with Martin Sourada from the Brno FUDCon. It is correct that what I have to do is: 1. print the PDF release form and sign it as a photographer 2. mail it to Martin in Prague 3. have Martin sign it as a model 4. have Martin mail it to Max in Amsterdam If the process is complicated as such, then I would prefer to follow it *only* for pictures that are to be used in the book, not for all the proposals.
On the same part about release forms, I feel the need of a clarification about "of everybody in that image", supposedly the photo is: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/photos/fudcon2008brno/day2/153-img_4427.jpg.html AFAIK, you need release form only for people who are recognizable in that photo, do I need here signatures from all the people or [how I expect] only from Martin? Clarification is important, I don't want to submit this particular picture: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/photos/fudcon2008brno/day1/038-img_4016.jpg.html but such a rule would effectively bare our something similar.
Now back to the instructions: I think we should understand that 1. the photographers may not be very good at speaking English and 2. they may be better with images than with words. So do not ask from them a completely developed story, but only a story *concept*.
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 10:02:00AM +0200, Nicu Buculei wrote:
Ian Weller wrote:
I need people like Nicu to look over the current uploading instructions and see if they contain all the necessary details. Please don't upload photos yet, though.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Submitting_images_for_the_picture_book
Let me digress a bit: I am not sure if I understood correctly the process with release forms. Supposedly I want to submit a photo with Martin Sourada from the Brno FUDCon. It is correct that what I have to do is:
- print the PDF release form and sign it as a photographer
- mail it to Martin in Prague
- have Martin sign it as a model
- have Martin mail it to Max in Amsterdam
If the process is complicated as such, then I would prefer to follow it *only* for pictures that are to be used in the book, not for all the proposals.
You only need one release form for every photographer-model pair. If you're uploading a lot of images to the wiki, you can just put something down like "Soundra-martin-0001 through 0005.jpg" in the filename box.
On the same part about release forms, I feel the need of a clarification about "of everybody in that image", supposedly the photo is: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/photos/fudcon2008brno/day2/153-img_4427.jpg.html AFAIK, you need release form only for people who are recognizable in that photo, do I need here signatures from all the people or [how I expect] only from Martin? Clarification is important, I don't want to submit this particular picture: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/photos/fudcon2008brno/day1/038-img_4016.jpg.html but such a rule would effectively bare our something similar.
IMO photos should focus on a few people. Large group photos would need everyone to sign the form, I think. So if you did get a photo of everybody at Brno for the picture book, you'll need everyone to sign a form. I'm relatively sure this is what Spot would say but I'll check if you want me to.
Now back to the instructions: I think we should understand that 1. the photographers may not be very good at speaking English and 2. they may be better with images than with words. So do not ask from them a completely developed story, but only a story *concept*.
Go ahead and fix the instructions as you see fit then.
marketing@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Chuck Anderson -
Felix Kaechele -
Greg DeKoenigsberg -
Ian Weller -
Jack Aboutboul -
Keiran Smith -
Max Spevack -
Michael Naughton -
Nicu Buculei -
Paul W. Frields -
Tom Callaway -
William Cattey