Board question regarding non-software goods.

[David Nalley]

First, my apologies for cross-posting.

Spot, Pam, et al:

At today's Board meeting[0] there was some significant backlash to the
proposed TM guidelines, specifically the non-software goods section.

The principal issue the Board would like to understand is:

What is the impact of not running requests for trademark approval for
non-software goods through the yet to be created trac instance (as is
currently the case).

e.g. is there a risk to the trademarks from the lack of documentation
of quantity, events distributed at, etc, or does this merely simplify
record keeping/keep someone from looking at the various budget
pages/meeting logs/mailing lists where these things are currently
discussed/record.

Additionally, a number of folks present at the Board meeting who are
involved in the acquisition and distribution of Fedora swag were
concerned with the additional overhead, and for clarification offered
up the following workflow that already happens:

Need for swag is discussed and agreed to by regional groups such as
FAmNA, EMEA Ambassadors, in public. Designs either generated or
proofed by Fedora Design (or are designs that have been generated or
approved in the past) and are then ordered. The bill is subsequently
paid by RHT (involving management approval of expense reports,
auditing by finance etc).

This presents the additional questions of:

* Does RHT ultimately paying (and thus at least tacitly, if not
explicitly approving of the usage) for the goods not make this TM
usage on the part of RHT and thus not needing approval?
* Is it permissible for the Board to delegate either to the various
groups within Fedora that produce swag, or perhaps to the regional
community RHT credit card holders, the ability to approve TM usage
within a well defined swag/non-software goods category.
* Despite the non-software goods section in the TM guidelines - swag
has been produced without Board approval for at least the past 4 years
- has there been a delegation of this authority already, or was
perhaps the understanding that RHT footing the bill indicated RHT
approval?

[0] http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-02-22/fedora_board.2012-02-22-18.29.log.html