Gentoo Archives: gentoo-nfp

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-nfp@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-nfp] Logo and Trademark Licensing
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:19:09
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-nfp] Logo and Trademark Licensing by Dale
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote:
> My question is this, when someone does what I described above on a social > site, how is Gentoo going to make sure people know which is the TRUE Gentoo > profile/page and which is done by someone else just using Gentoo's logo?
So, the current policy already states: you clearly state that the content, project, site, product or any other type of item with which the "g" logo or Gentoo artwork is associated is not part of the Gentoo project and is not directed or managed by Gentoo Foundation, Inc. So, any non-official site using the logo would have to explicitly state that they are non-official or they are in violation of trademark. The situation with Google+ was that initially there was a concern that like domains you could only have one site with a given name, so there was a mad rush to register Gentoo to ensure that somebody who cared about the distro controlled it. Then over the next day or so we figured out which one was most popular and made that one the official one. The other pages should be gone now - if any still use the logo point them out if they aren't in compliance with the logo rules and we can work it out with them. Clearly any future logo policy will need to continue to have a similar statement in it. Some distros go a step futher and require explicit permission before allowing anybody to put their trademark in a domain. So, if you created "" you'd need Canonical's permission in advance, from their perspective (though fair use could very well protect you). Being that Gentoo is a community distro I think we're fine with the current wording - use the logo to draw attention to Gentoo (if you're non-commercial), but make it clear that you aren't speaking for Gentoo when you do it. If in doubt, ask for permission. I think we could take the approach some distros have taken and give examples of uses that are and are not acceptable to Gentoo. The wording would of course say that they are illustrative and not exhaustive but it could reduce confusion. Rich