proposal to make free the logo of Fedora

inode0 inode0 at
Fri Sep 17 18:15:07 UTC 2010

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 09:23, inode0 <inode0 at> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Jon Masters <jonathan at> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 17:21 +0200, René Mérou wrote:
>>>> I understood something now that i did not knew before: The trademark is not in
>>>> the hands and decision of the community.  Its in the hands of the enterprise.
>>>> I'm not telling that's a bad thing or a good thing.  Its just i did not
>>>> understood that before. In this situation i would propose the same of you, to
>>>> create a new logo 100% free for the use of the community.
>>> Let's make something clear, though. Even if the community makes a "free"
>>> logo, it isn't going to be able to allow just any use of it, if it wants
>>> that logo to have legal protection.
>> But it doesn't want it to have that legal protection. The folks who
>> want it see value in a free logo that outweighs the possible negative
>> consequences. If we can adequately function without control of what
>> people naturally assume would be our domain name and if we can
>> function with another software related organization also using the
>> name Fedora I personally don't see great danger from a free logo.
>> There is a reasonable case to be made on both sides of this.
> Actually we have some control of "what people naturally assume would
> be our domain name" in what is considered to be "legal" for trademark
> enforcement. If the other websites were to advertise with our "mark"
> and our "market" then we would have enforcement potential. If they do
> not, then we do not.

I meant which many people assume is where they would find
information about the Fedora Project.

>> Just as an aside, does the Fedora Project need a sign-off on creating
>> such a free mark from Red Hat legal? Or are we just asking for such a
>> sign-off to be cooperative with the good work Red Hat legal provides
>> our community and because we value their position on the relative
>> weight to give to the benefits of such a logo vs. the dangers legally
>> and with respect to brand dilution?
> I would say it depends on what is legally defined entity known as
> "The Fedora Project" means. It depends on the difference between "The
> Fedora Project" versus "The Fedora Community" in todays laws versus
> what the Internet has made such things. It would depend on what
> legally is looked at trademark infringement and trademark
> weakening/loss. It would depend on a bunch of legal factors in each of
> the countries areas that the current trademarks (Name, Image, etc etc)
> are considered registered.
> It also depends on who "we" means in your sentences above. It is not
> clearly defined so does that mean "You and Rene", "people unamed", the
> "royal we", or some other group.
> All of those things matter whether a person or set of people who
> define themselves as  a community do not care about them.

Don't read so much into my question. If the Fedora Project, however
you'd like to define that but I'd be fine for the sake of argument to
define it as the Fedora Board, said tomorrow that X is now our free
logo for the project ... is that ok? Or is there some legal thing that
requires the Fedora Board to ask permission from Red Hat legal to do

Either way I'm not suggesting we shouldn't follow the advice of Red
Hat legal on this matter. I'm just a bit unclear about the boundary.
We seem to create under free licenses images that are intended to
represent the Fedora Project in various ways currently without to my
knowledge asking Red Hat legal to approve them. Is there something
about a "logo" that makes that process different?


More information about the advisory-board mailing list