Fedora Trademark Guidelines Revised Draft Comments

[inode0]

I'm back again and while I tried asking questions and giving feedback
to the earlier draft on the legal list none of my questions were
answered there so this time I'll just give my feedback to the Board
knowing that legal reads this list as well and can take them or leave
them as they deem appropriate. If the Board shares any of my concerns
perhaps they are better situated to work with legal to resolve them.

The current draft for reference is located here

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pchestek/TMGuidelinesDraft#Non-Software_Promotional_Goods

My first concern which still remains in this draft is singling out
Fedora Ambassadors when they are not the only contributors who have
done this work. So the way this reads now is if you are a Fedora
Ambassador this long section with 3 external links applies to you and
if you are doing exactly the same thing but you are not a Fedora
Ambassador it seems you just ask the Board for permission (which
frankly seems to be the path of far less resistance to me). Please
generalize these guidelines so that they apply equally to everyone
producing merchandise for use at Fedora events.

Bullet point #2 quoted here for reference:

* The Goods must be of a Pre-Approved Type (currently that is shirt,
sweatshirt, hat, sticker, temporary tattoo, button, balloon, banner,
poster, cup, or pen/pencil). Items printed on "normal" sized paper are
not considered Non-Software Promotional Goods in this context, and are
acceptable as long as any Trademark and/or Logo use is in compliance
with the Fedora Trademark and/or Logo Guidelines.

This is an interesting list of pre-approved types. Some of these items
have previously been produced, others haven't in my memory. Other
items that have been previously produced are not included on this
list. What qualifies types to be pre-approved, specifically for items
that we have been producing for years? Does "sticker" mean any sort of
sticker or only some particular stickers? Can this list be generalized
at all to include common types that are produced by Red Hat itself and
other corporations for professional events so we don't need have some
process to go through to make a frisbee or a can koozie?

With any list, no matter how we tweak it today, the existence of this
list means we will all be less likely to produce anything not already
on it because that will involve extra work. So my bigger concern here
is why the contributors who have been picking these types without
embarrassing Red Hat or the Fedora Project for years are now not
trusted to continue doing so?

Bullet point #3 quoted here for reference:

* The Goods must use a Fedora Approved Design (as found on the Fedora
Approved Designs page) <LINK>. Fedora Approved Designs are designs
which have been reviewed by Fedora Legal for compliance with the
Fedora Logo Guidelines.

This hides the process behind a missing link making it impossible to
give any feedback regarding whether or to what extent this process
will be a burden. I can ask one question about it though. Why are only
designs used on Fedora Ambassador produced goods subject to this
requirement for a Fedora Legal compliance check?

Bullet point #4 quoted here for reference:

* The Goods must be produced by a Vendor who is listed as a "Good
Vendor" on the "Fedora Non-Software Vendors" wiki page <LINK>. Vendors
marked as "Bad Vendors" must not be used. New Vendors must be added by
the Ambassador to the "Good Vendor" list, and can be then be
immediately used. Ambassadors are expected to move Vendors into the
"Bad Vendor" list if/when they receive poor quality goods or have
extreme difficulties dealing with the Vendor.

This is a deal breaker for me. Red Hat claims no responsibility for
any content on the wiki and expects me to present a vendor in a
negative light on it? Vendors and really any business will get cranky
about things like this and who will they take it up with if they are
cranky enough to bother with it? Red Hat isn't responsible for this
content so who is? Me? No thanks.

The final sentence of this section says "If a Fedora Ambassador wishes
to produce Non-Software Promotion Goods of a New Type or a New Design,
they must first receive approval for the New Type or Design from
Fedora Legal. For details on how to request approval, see <LINK>."

Again a missing link where all the details will be revealed. In the
first draft there was a lot of information about tracking and record
keeping using a trac instance. There is none in this draft currently
but will all of that resurface in the details on this <LINK>?

While I think this entire process is antagonistic toward contributors
who have been helping Fedora present itself in a good light for many
years I don't know how we are really supposed to give feedback when
there isn't full transparency about our obligations under these new
guidelines.

My feathers are admittedly ruffled because I find it absurd that the
work that we have done for years is resulting in our being singled out
as a group that needs to be micro-managed by Fedora Legal. I'm sure
that isn't the perspective of Fedora Legal, at least I hope it isn't.
But I have not been given any reasonable justification for treating
Ambassadors this way and no one else.

While I know Ambassadors would like to have all the missing details
revealed so they can really understand what they are going to be
required to do to comply with these guidelines, what is already
revealed is enough for me to respectfully ask the Board to not approve
them in their current form. The Good Vendor/Bad Vendor bit is enough
by itself to make me stop dead in my tracks.

John