1 |
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> tl;dr Consider relicensing the blue "g" logo [1] and the red "gentoo" |
3 |
> logo [2] under CC-BY-SA-2.5 (or 3.0). |
4 |
> |
5 |
> Currently, different versions of the "g" logo are distributed under |
6 |
> different licenses. The vector version [3] is distributed under |
7 |
> CC-BY-SA-2.5, but the Blender version [1] under CC-Sampling-Plus-1.0. |
8 |
> I would like to ask Trustees to reconsider their decision (taken in |
9 |
> the 2010-08-15 meeting) on the license of the Blender version, for the |
10 |
> following reasons. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> [Most of the following is taken from my comments in [4]. Repeating and |
13 |
> complementing it here for convenience.] |
14 |
> |
15 |
> 1. Creative Commons have retired their Sampling-Plus licenses on |
16 |
> 2011-09-12, see [5] and [6] for details. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> 2. CC-Sampling-Plus-1.0 is incompatible with most free licenses, |
19 |
> including all versions of CC-BY and CC-BY-SA. Consider the following |
20 |
> example: A Gentoo developer gives a talk at a conference, and licenses |
21 |
> it under CC-BY-SA-3.0. The original image of the "g" logo is used on |
22 |
> the title page, and a lightened version is used as page background. |
23 |
> Now, since CC-Sampling-Plus-1.0 is incompatible with CC-BY-SA-3.0, the |
24 |
> slides cannot be distributed at all. I doubt that this is the result |
25 |
> which is desired in this scenario. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> 3. Two different legal tools are mixed here, namely copyright and |
28 |
> trademark protection. Note that there are large corporations whose |
29 |
> logo doesn't meet the threshold of originality [7,8] or where |
30 |
> copyright has expired [9]. These logos are in the public domain, |
31 |
> as far as copyright is concerned, but there is trademark protection |
32 |
> nevertheless. Apparently, these corporations don't think that the |
33 |
> missing copyright protection of their logo would dilute their brand. |
34 |
> |
35 |
> 4. I doubt that having different licenses (namely CC-Sampling-Plus-1.0 |
36 |
> and CC-BY-SA-2.5) for versions of the logo that have only slightly |
37 |
> different visual appearance could help protecting the Gentoo brand. |
38 |
> Someone who is using the vector version in violation of the Name and |
39 |
> Logo Usage Guidelines could argue that these don't apply to the vector |
40 |
> version, because the Gentoo Foundation itself makes a distinction |
41 |
> between the two versions. |
42 |
> Therefore, I'd rather see all versions of the "g" logo treated the |
43 |
> same (and licensed under CC-BY-SA-2.5), with a clarification added to |
44 |
> the Guidelines that these are only differently rendered versions of |
45 |
> the same (trademarked) logo. In fact, from the drawing submitted to |
46 |
> the USPTO [10] it is impossible to distinguish to which of the two |
47 |
> versions of the logo the trademark would apply. |
48 |
> |
49 |
> 5. Finally, I find CC-Sampling-Plus a curious choice of a license |
50 |
> for our logo. It encourages distribution of derivative works that are |
51 |
> "highly transformative of the original". IMHO, this is the last thing |
52 |
> one would want for a trademarked logo. Indeed it directly contradicts |
53 |
> the Name and Logo Usage Guidelines which explicitly forbid variations |
54 |
> "that change the aspect ratio or otherwise distort the shape" [11]. |
55 |
> |
56 |
> In conclusion, please consider relicensing the Blender version of the |
57 |
> blue "g" logo [1] under CC-BY-SA-2.5, identical to the vector version. |
58 |
> (Alternatively, version 3.0 of the same license could be used, which |
59 |
> would agree with the license used for most of our documentation. |
60 |
> Double licensing under || ( CC-BY-SA-2.5 CC-Sampling-Plus-1.0 ) would |
61 |
> be possible, too.) |
62 |
> |
63 |
> Most of the above arguments also apply to the red "gentoo" logo [2] |
64 |
> which contains the "g" as its first letter. |
65 |
> |
66 |
> Ulrich |
67 |
> |
68 |
> |
69 |
> [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Artwork/Artwork#The_blue_.22g.22_logo |
70 |
> [2] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Artwork/Artwork#The_red_.22gentoo.22_logo |
71 |
> [3] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Artwork/Artwork#Vector_version_.22g.22_logo |
72 |
> [4] https://bugs.gentoo.org/293309 comments #23 and #29 |
73 |
> [5] http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses |
74 |
> [6] http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/28874 |
75 |
> [7] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:3M_wordmark.svg |
76 |
> [8] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Deutsche_Bank_logo_without_wordmark.svg |
77 |
> [9] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mercedes_benz_logo_1926.png |
78 |
> [10] http://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn78323020&docId=DRW20050429125158#docIndex=16&page=1 |
79 |
> [11] https://www.gentoo.org/inside-gentoo/foundation/name-logo-guidelines.html#merchandise |
80 |
|
81 |
Hi Ulrich, |
82 |
|
83 |
Added to the Nov meeting agenda. |
84 |
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Meetings/2016/11#New_Business |
85 |
-- |
86 |
David Abbott |