Moblin -> MeeGo
robyn.bergeron at gmail.com
Wed Jul 14 17:58:31 UTC 2010
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:16:38AM -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Paul Frields <stickster at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > The reason is that MeeGo is a trademark owned by the Linux Foundation,
>> > with its own set of usage guidelines -- which is what I wrote in my
>> > first email. We are aiming to meet their requirements because we
>> > respect their trademark guidelines the same way we expect others to
>> > respect ours.
>> > Fedora spins have never had requirements around their naming other
>> > than that their usage be approved by the Board, as a requirement for
>> > using the Fedora trademarks.
>> So given that this is the first interaction between our trademark
>> policy and an external trademark policy... perhaps its appropriate to
>> look at this as a chance to set up a style of naming as a better best
>> practise convention for spin naming. You can't future proof for all
>> such interactions of course. But its good to have an understanding as
>> to whether this naming form is meant to be an exception or a best
>> practise moving forward.
>> First question:
>> Does "The Whatever Spin by Fedora" form hold value as a best practise
>> for spin naming generally?
> One way we can assess whether another party would accept such a
> convention ("$X Spin by Fedora") is to see what the Linux Foundation's
> counsel thinks of it. I've sent a request to LF for their feedback.
> Our own legal counsel didn't look unfavorably on that naming when I
> propsed it. If LF also finds it acceptable, that's another good data
> We could suggest it to the legal list (where I believe at least a
> couple of other attorneys lurk) for additional feedback. What other
> steps do you think would be appropriate to make this a best practice?
>> Second question:
>> Does this construction:"The MeeGo Spin by Fedora, a Fedora Remix"
>> meet the multi-organizational guidelines as well allowing use of the
>> secondary mark? And if so is this a potential best practise
>> construction for spins that want to use the secondary fedora remix
> A Spin and a Remix are not the same thing, so this wouldn't be
> appropriate IMHO. It confuses the terms.
There is some good info here on what the differences are:
> 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/
> Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com
> advisory-board mailing list
> advisory-board at lists.fedoraproject.org
More information about the advisory-board