wording change in trademark delegation policy

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:55:25AM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> I think it was implicit that the Council/Board would honor Fedora
> Legal's veto. The only reason I bring it up now is because we're
> delegating it out to SIGs who may not be aware of that situation.

Before we go too far, note that I was reading the linked policy without
enough coffee and missed that this is really a "SIG gets things inline,
council approves after" policy rather than a "council deligates the
approval decision" policy -- line 3 still includes "submit to Council".
So perhaps this is all moot.

> If you'd rather have me put it in the Trademark_guidelines, I have no
> issue with it being there, but I do want to make sure the SIGs are aware
> of it.

While I also can't imagine a real situation where the the council would
disregard our own legal here, I think it's better for any veto power to
be clearly documented rather than implicit.

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader