Logo guidelines status.
Gain Paolo Mureddu
gmureddu at prodigy.net.mx
Thu May 18 10:34:04 UTC 2006
Patrick W. Barnes escribió:
> The guidelines are still under construction. If you haven't gotten
> authorization, it could be that your request has yet to be reviewed, or that
> you have presented a usage case for which a decision has not yet been made.
> In order to begin developing your graphics, you can access an SVG form of the
> logo that is probably already on your system:
I've seen it, thank you for pointing it out, though. Found it doing an
rpm -ql fedora-logos
> It is part of the fedora-logos package in Fedora Core 5.
> Even though you may develop your graphics, you should not publish them
> anywhere until you have proper authorization.
Which is why I'm waiting authorization... It's been a couple times (in
the past months) that I've requested the logo for the very same purposes
DVD case covers and brochoures and other stuff... I know I won't be
doing any harm to the Fedora image, but I still need the green flag to
do it... just confuses the heck out of me this situation, as I'm not
free to do what I'd like to do to PROMOTE Fedora (maybe it's just me,
but that seems paradoxical).
> There are no plans to purchase and release the font as open. Last I heard, a
> free font to complement the logo was in the works, but the original font will
> not be made free anytime in the foreseeable future. It is an unfortunate
> truth, but it is one we must live with for now.
> The original font name is Bryant 2. It is available from Process Type
> You're welcome to make an offer to them to purchase rights to release the font
> as open, but you'd better have some deep pockets. ;-)
And taht's just what I simply don't get... How did the logo using this
font got approved in the first place?, of Fedora which advocates use of
freely available (freedom, no bounds attached, not free as in beer)
tools, software, docs, etc. The idea of the bubble+f+infinity is
excellent, but I can't help but wonder why the "fedora" part was
approved (which is part of the logo, from what I gather), and not only
that, but USED by the project when the font is not free (why was not
used a free font instead? It's beyond me)... Anyway, personally I liked
the old font better, but that's just me...
More information about the marketing