[fab] Licensing the Fedora logo

[seth vidal]

On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 14:24 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> To circle back on this:
> 
> The fundamental problem with any artwork that contains the Fedora logo is 
> this:
> 
> THE FEDORA LOGO IS NOT PART OF ANY COMMONS.  IT IS A TRADEMARK THAT RED 
> HAT INTENDS TO PROTECT.
> 
> Legally, I just don't see any middle ground *at all* here.  There is no
> current OSS/CC license we could grant that would allow us editorial
> control over the *use* of the mark -- which is the key demand of our legal
> department.
> 
> The Fedora Logo is not redistributable without permission, period.  Which
> means that the CC NoDerivs license would be unacceptable, and the OPL
> would be unacceptable.
> 
> If we can't even allow *free redistribution* of the logo, then how can we
> allow *free modification and redistribution*?  The answer is, WE CAN'T.  
> To repeat: NONE OF THE CURRENT OSS/CC LICENSES APPLY.  PERIOD.
> 
> Am I wrong here?  Mark?  Anyone?  
> 
> ===
> 
> If I'm right, it means that we must come up with an approval process for
> both redistribution and modification of *any* artwork that contains the
> Fedora logo -- a process that has the lowest possible overhead, and which
> makes it *crystal clear* that the logo is NOT OPEN.
> 
> (This, by the way, is precisely why I've been advocating so strongly for 
> two logos.  Re: the "official Debian logo," maybe the reason no one ever 
> sees it is that Debian has a very difficult time doing anything in an 
> "official" capacity.)
> 
> --g
> 

Can we take the current 'official' logo and make it the shareable one
and have an official logo that is something else?

I mean if the public logo is an infinity sign maybe we can make the
protected logo a nullset?

-sv