Fedora derivatives branding discussion

Chitlesh GOORAH chitlesh at fedoraproject.org
Thu Apr 20 20:05:50 UTC 2006

> Greg and I had an interesting conversation with some of our lawyers not
> too long ago in which we went to them with the idea of having two marks --
> one "official" mark that was strongly protected, and a second mark that
> was more open and permissive in its terms.

For the second one, we can propose a different fedora-logos-XXX.rpm.
Thus as it's said
here http://fedora.redhat.com/about/trademarks/guidelines/page5.html
there wont corruption for mere deletion of certain files.

If we don't propose another fedora-logos-XXX.rpm, guidelines will be enough.

Last time, for Kadischi I came up with some Legal stuffs due to some
requests on the matter.

Its contents are what we are proposing for the moment.

To my guess, these are some areas  of thoughts we must be working on
for branding:
*built from
- Fedora Core, Extras Packages only
- Fedora Core, Extras Packages with own packages which are abiding
Fedora Policies.
   ---> ask to push to Extras
- Fedora Core, Extras Packages with propriety softwares
   ---> I know Livna is not officially supported. but at least we
might as them to push their propriety packages over there. But still
it's against Fedora Policy.
- from sources provided by fedora
*Derived From Fedora
* a fork of Fedora

#004, would there be special marks for product of livecd tool
(kadischi) provided by the Fedora Project?

If yes, I should work on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Kadischi/Legal as well.


More information about the marketing mailing list