I am, as described - a sharey license on the logo in the code and
restrictions on the use in trademark guidelines.

Pam

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:35 AM Tom Callaway <[email protected]> wrote:

> Pam,
>
> To be absolutely clear, I am not aware of any real-world examples of a set
> of trademark guidelines causing incompatibilities, but with the badgeware
> licenses... it's hypothetically possible that a malicious actor could try
> to create such a scenario.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 9:49 AM Pamela Chestek <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Ok, now you got me started ...
>>
>> I would not consider trademark guidelines as enforceable against the user
>> of a trademark. You have no idea whether a user ever saw them and probably
>> there is no mechanism for obtaining the assent of the person. (OTOH, they
>> are enforceable against the trademark owner under equitable principles like
>> estoppel.)
>>
>> So if the copyright license says "modify, share!!", you may not be able
>> to undo that by saying in the trademark guidelines, "oh, we didn't really
>> mean that thing we said about 'modify, share!!' in the copyright license."
>>
>> Will you be able to say "well, we're talking about two different things
>> here, they can modify and share the *copyright*, but trademark is a
>> whole different matter and just because they can copy and share the
>> copyright doesn't mean they get to create confusion!!" Yes, you can argue
>> that. Will it work? Maybe. Do I think that it's going to work 100% of the
>> time? Nope. (Reflect for a moment on patent licenses granted implicitly
>> because of the copyright grant.) But what will work 100% of the time is NOT
>> granting a "modify, share!!" copyright license to start.
>>
>> Pam
>>
>> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 12:44 PM Tom Callaway <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hmmmm. I wonder what the SPDX answer is for "copyright license on a logo
>>> that really should be trademark guidelines"...
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 12:41 PM Miro Hrončok <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14. 05. 20 18:37, Tom Callaway wrote:
>>>> > In this case, this is a logo, which is also a trademark (though, not
>>>> a
>>>> > registered one as far as I can see).
>>>> >
>>>> > Since the software does not require the logo to be present (or to be
>>>> more
>>>> > specific, the software _license_ does not require this), and there
>>>> are no
>>>> > restrictions on distribution (only modification), it seems to me that
>>>> this logo
>>>> > presents no real risk or burden to our users or downstream.
>>>> Additionally, it is
>>>> > noteworthy that the Fedora logos (and other FOSS logos such as the
>>>> Firefox and
>>>> > Chromium logo) are part of Fedora with similar restrictions on
>>>> modifying them.
>>>> > Ideally, these restrictions would be separated from the copyright
>>>> licensing (as
>>>> > they would be more applicable as trademark use guidelines), but the
>>>> intent is clear.
>>>> >
>>>> > Assuming that Richard Fontana agrees, I would be inclined to clarify
>>>> our stance
>>>> > on permissible content (as found here:
>>>> >
>>>> https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging:What_Can_Be_Packaged)
>>>> to
>>>> > call out the following as another example of permissible content:
>>>> >
>>>> > * Logos/trademarks are permissible, as long as all of the following
>>>> conditions
>>>> > are met:
>>>> >   A. The logo/trademark files are distributed by the owner (or with
>>>> the clear
>>>> > and explicit permission of the owner)
>>>> >   B. The logo/trademark files are distributable by third-parties.
>>>> >   C. The logo/trademark files have a direct relationship to software
>>>> under an
>>>> > acceptable license that is present in Fedora (or about to be added at
>>>> the same time)
>>>> >   D. Any existing trademark guidelines/restrictions/rules on the
>>>> > logos/trademarks do not prevent Fedora (or anyone) from fully
>>>> exercising the
>>>> > rights given them in the licensing on the associated software.
>>>> > Permission to modify is not required for logos/trademarks, but their
>>>> use must
>>>> > NOT be contingent upon restrictions that would conflict with the
>>>> license terms
>>>> > of the associated software. Two examples:
>>>> > 1. The associated software may require the removal or replacement of
>>>> the
>>>> > logos/trademarks if the software is modified. Removing/replacing the
>>>> logos does
>>>> > not prevent Fedora (or anyone) from fully exercising the rights given
>>>> to them in
>>>> > the FOSS software license. In this case, the software and the logos
>>>> would be
>>>> > permissible, but the logos may have to be removed/replaced if Fedora
>>>> (or anyone
>>>> > downstream) makes modifications to the software. Packagers in such a
>>>> situation
>>>> > should be especially careful.
>>>> > 2. The software license cannot require the logos/trademarks to be
>>>> used in the
>>>> > software and simultaneously have trademark guidelines that only
>>>> permit use on
>>>> > unmodified versions of the software. In this scenario, neither the
>>>> logos nor the
>>>> > software would be permissible in Fedora.
>>>> > If you're not sure if a logo/trademark is acceptable for inclusion,
>>>> feel free to
>>>> > bring the specific situation to the attention of Fedora Legal for
>>>> review.
>>>> >
>>>> > ****
>>>> > Under these criteria, the lua logo would be acceptable (as would the
>>>> existing
>>>> > Firefox/Chromium logos).
>>>> >
>>>> > Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> This is exactly the rule I assumed we already had but couldn't find.
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> BTW If this goes fine, what would I put in License? GPLv2 and Lua Logo?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Miro Hrončok
>>>> --
>>>> Phone: +420777974800
>>>> IRC: mhroncok
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> legal mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>> Fedora Code of Conduct:
>>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>>> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>>> List Archives:
>>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
>>>
>>
_______________________________________________
legal mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]

Reply via email to