Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
Greetings, Fellow Debianists, this is not actually a bug report but something that might concern us all as a matter of Free Software use inside the Debian project: The Debian logo file at http://www.debian.org/logos/openlogo.svg fails to load in the much-respected SVG-based graphics editor Inkscape (which I use daily and which works fine also for svg files not produced by itself). The error is this: $ inkscape openlogo.svg openlogo.svg:18: namespace warning : xmlns: URI ns_svg; is not absolute xmlns=ns_svg; xmlns:xlink=ns_xlink; xmlns:a=http://ns.adobe.com/AdobeSV ^ openlogo.svg:22: namespace warning : xmlns: URI ns_vars; is not absolute variableSets xmlns=ns_vars; ^ openlogo.svg:25: namespace warning : xmlns: URI ns_custom; is not absolute v:sampleDataSets xmlns=ns_custom; xmlns:v=ns_vars;/v:sampleDataSet ^ openlogo.svg:28: namespace warning : xmlns: URI ns_sfw; is not absolute sfw xmlns=ns_sfw; ^ Note that The Gimp seems to load the file just fine, although also with an error message: Execution error for procedure 'gimp-vectors-import-from-file': Failed to import paths from 'openlogo.svg': Error on line 17: Entity name 'ns_extend' is not known Also, Iceweasel seems to load the file fine since it displays correctly. While I'm no expert in XML stuff, I see in the following lines at the top of the file that the problems might relate to some Adobe-specific namespace rules (or extensions, or whatever): ?xml version=1.0 encoding=utf-8? !-- Generator: Adobe Illustrator 10.0, SVG Export Plug-In . SVG Version: 3.0.0 Build 77) -- !DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD SVG 1.0//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-SVG-20010904/DTD/svg10.dtd; [ !ENTITY ns_flows http://ns.adobe.com/Flows/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_extend http://ns.adobe.com/Extensibility/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_ai http://ns.adobe.com/AdobeIllustrator/10.0/; !ENTITY ns_graphs http://ns.adobe.com/Graphs/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_vars http://ns.adobe.com/Variables/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_imrep http://ns.adobe.com/ImageReplacement/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_sfw http://ns.adobe.com/SaveForWeb/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_custom http://ns.adobe.com/GenericCustomNamespace/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_adobe_xpath http://ns.adobe.com/XPath/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_svg http://www.w3.org/2000/svg; !ENTITY ns_xlink http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink; ] Because opening the file in The Gimp transforms the svg graphics object into a raster graphics object, the vector benefits of svg are lost and thus The Gimp cannot be used as a substitute of Inkscape. We may want to make sure that this file loads fine in Free Software graphics svg-based programs and maybe convert it to either a more generic svg file, or at least something free (Inkscape might be a good candidate for this). Any thoughts ? Cheers, Filippo -- Filippo Rusconi, PhD - public crypto key C78F687C @ pgp.mit.edu Researcher at CNRS and Debian Developer lopi...@debian.org Author of ``massXpert'' at http://www.massxpert.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 04:35:23PM +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: Greetings, Fellow Debianists, this is not actually a bug report but something that might concern us all as a matter of Free Software use inside the Debian project: The Debian logo file at http://www.debian.org/logos/openlogo.svg fails to load in the much-respected SVG-based graphics editor Inkscape (which I use daily and which works fine also for svg files not produced by itself). The error is this: $ inkscape openlogo.svg openlogo.svg:18: namespace warning : xmlns: URI ns_svg; is not absolute xmlns=ns_svg; xmlns:xlink=ns_xlink; xmlns:a=http://ns.adobe.com/AdobeSV ^ openlogo.svg:22: namespace warning : xmlns: URI ns_vars; is not absolute variableSets xmlns=ns_vars; ^ openlogo.svg:25: namespace warning : xmlns: URI ns_custom; is not absolute v:sampleDataSets xmlns=ns_custom; xmlns:v=ns_vars;/v:sampleDataSet ^ openlogo.svg:28: namespace warning : xmlns: URI ns_sfw; is not absolute sfw xmlns=ns_sfw; ^ Erm, it works here -- what version are you using? :\ Note that The Gimp seems to load the file just fine, although also with an error message: Execution error for procedure 'gimp-vectors-import-from-file': Failed to import paths from 'openlogo.svg': Error on line 17: Entity name 'ns_extend' is not known Also, Iceweasel seems to load the file fine since it displays correctly. While I'm no expert in XML stuff, I see in the following lines at the top of the file that the problems might relate to some Adobe-specific namespace rules (or extensions, or whatever): ?xml version=1.0 encoding=utf-8? !-- Generator: Adobe Illustrator 10.0, SVG Export Plug-In . SVG Version: 3.0.0 Build 77) -- !DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD SVG 1.0//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-SVG-20010904/DTD/svg10.dtd; [ !ENTITY ns_flows http://ns.adobe.com/Flows/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_extend http://ns.adobe.com/Extensibility/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_ai http://ns.adobe.com/AdobeIllustrator/10.0/; !ENTITY ns_graphs http://ns.adobe.com/Graphs/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_vars http://ns.adobe.com/Variables/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_imrep http://ns.adobe.com/ImageReplacement/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_sfw http://ns.adobe.com/SaveForWeb/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_custom http://ns.adobe.com/GenericCustomNamespace/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_adobe_xpath http://ns.adobe.com/XPath/1.0/; !ENTITY ns_svg http://www.w3.org/2000/svg; !ENTITY ns_xlink http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink; ] Because opening the file in The Gimp transforms the svg graphics object into a raster graphics object, the vector benefits of svg are lost and thus The Gimp cannot be used as a substitute of Inkscape. We may want to make sure that this file loads fine in Free Software graphics svg-based programs and maybe convert it to either a more generic svg file, or at least something free (Inkscape might be a good candidate for this). Any thoughts ? Cheers, Filippo -- Filippo Rusconi, PhD - public crypto key C78F687C @ pgp.mit.edu Researcher at CNRS and Debian Developer lopi...@debian.org Author of ``massXpert'' at http://www.massxpert.org Fondly, Paul -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte paul...@debian.org : :' : Proud Debian Developer `. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
On Thu, 2013-01-24 at 16:35 +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: fails to load in the much-respected SVG-based graphics editor Inkscape (which I use daily and which works fine also for svg files not produced by itself). In mine it loads, version 0.48.3.1-1.3. Cheers, Chris. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 04:35:23PM +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: We may want to make sure that this file loads fine in Free Software graphics svg-based programs and maybe convert it to either a more generic svg file, or at least something free (Inkscape might be a good candidate for this). Agreed. Any thoughts ? How about patches welcome? :) This is not meant to be tongue-in-cheek, but a very pragmatic suggestion. I'm no SVG expert either, but AFAICT all the source info are indeed in that .svg file, it is just that due to some minor syntactic issues (I speculate: due to the age of the .svg in question) it doesn't work properly with current version of popular FOSS SVG editors. Let's just find SVG experts in our community and ask them to fix the source code. Posting a call for help about this on -dekstop might actually be a useful way forward. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
Hello Chris, thanks for bothering :-) On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 04:51:43PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: On Thu, 2013-01-24 at 16:35 +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: fails to load in the much-respected SVG-based graphics editor Inkscape (which I use daily and which works fine also for svg files not produced by itself). In mine it loads, version 0.48.3.1-1.3. $ inkscape --version Inkscape 0.48.3.1 r9886 (Dec 29 2012) $ dpkg -l inkscape ii inkscape 0.48.3.1-1.3 amd64 So, I would say this is odd. $ sha1sum openlogo.svg f958ec1c5eaf8c8507e6830852292081fca1 openlogo.svg could you confirm this on a file that you have wget http://www.debian.org/logos/openlogo.svg Thanks, Filippo -- Filippo Rusconi, PhD - public crypto key C78F687C @ pgp.mit.edu Researcher at CNRS and Debian Developer lopi...@debian.org Author of ``massXpert'' at http://www.massxpert.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130124160824.GE5622@licorne
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
Hello Stefano, On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 04:53:44PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 04:35:23PM +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: We may want to make sure that this file loads fine in Free Software graphics svg-based programs and maybe convert it to either a more generic svg file, or at least something free (Inkscape might be a good candidate for this). Agreed. Any thoughts ? How about patches welcome? :) This is not meant to be tongue-in-cheek, but a very pragmatic suggestion. I'm no SVG expert either, but AFAICT all the source info are indeed in that .svg file, it is just that due to some minor syntactic issues (I speculate: due to the age of the .svg in question) it doesn't work properly with current version of popular FOSS SVG editors. Investigating a bit, I found that http://www.adobe.com/AdobeSVGViewerExtensions/3.0/ gives a 404 in my browser. This url is at line 18 of the file. Same for http://www.adobe.com/Extensibility/1.0/ Let's just find SVG experts in our community and ask them to fix the source code. Posting a call for help about this on -dekstop might actually be a useful way forward. We certainly need some experts knowing what they do :-) By the way, is the author of this file known ? Maybe he/she could help? Cheers, Filippo -- Filippo Rusconi, PhD - public crypto key C78F687C @ pgp.mit.edu Researcher at CNRS and Debian Developer lopi...@debian.org Author of ``massXpert'' at http://www.massxpert.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130124161346.GF5622@licorne
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 05:08:24PM +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: Hello Chris, thanks for bothering :-) On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 04:51:43PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: On Thu, 2013-01-24 at 16:35 +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: fails to load in the much-respected SVG-based graphics editor Inkscape (which I use daily and which works fine also for svg files not produced by itself). In mine it loads, version 0.48.3.1-1.3. $ inkscape --version Inkscape 0.48.3.1 r9886 (Dec 29 2012) $ dpkg -l inkscape ii inkscape 0.48.3.1-1.3 amd64 So, I would say this is odd. $ sha1sum openlogo.svg f958ec1c5eaf8c8507e6830852292081fca1 openlogo.svg could you confirm this on a file that you have wget http://www.debian.org/logos/openlogo.svg I'm not Chris, but: [tag@leliel:~/Downloads][11:19 AM]$ inkscape --version Inkscape 0.48.3.1 r9886 (Jun 20 2012) [tag@leliel:~/Downloads][11:19 AM]$ dpkg -l | grep inkscape ii inkscape 0.48.3.1-1.1 [tag@leliel:~/Downloads][11:19 AM]$ inkscape openlogo.svg [ it works ] [tag@leliel:~/Downloads][11:19 AM]$ shasum openlogo.svg f958ec1c5eaf8c8507e6830852292081fca1 openlogo.svg (amd64) Thanks, Filippo -- Filippo Rusconi, PhD - public crypto key C78F687C @ pgp.mit.edu Researcher at CNRS and Debian Developer lopi...@debian.org Author of ``massXpert'' at http://www.massxpert.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130124160824.GE5622@licorne -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte paul...@debian.org : :' : Proud Debian Developer `. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
On Thu, 2013-01-24 at 17:08 +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: $ sha1sum openlogo.svg f958ec1c5eaf8c8507e6830852292081fca1 openlogo.svg could you confirm this on a file that you have wget http://www.debian.org/logos/openlogo.svg Funny: inkscape openlogo.svg = fails inkscape http://www.debian.org/logos/openlogo.svg = works ^^ Cheers, Chris. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net wrote: On Thu, 2013-01-24 at 16:35 +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: fails to load in the much-respected SVG-based graphics editor Inkscape (which I use daily and which works fine also for svg files not produced by itself). In mine it loads, version 0.48.3.1-1.3. Curious. I am using the same version (0.48.3.1-1.3) and get the specified failure in the original post. -mz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caolfk3xaumqe0eiq_0tfy5ryd0tsz6j8h_dgfrcg_oawyvt...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
* Filippo Rusconi lopi...@debian.org, 2013-01-24, 17:13: Investigating a bit, I found that http://www.adobe.com/AdobeSVGViewerExtensions/3.0/ gives a 404 in my browser. This url is at line 18 of the file. Same for http://www.adobe.com/Extensibility/1.0/ That's not a problem. Namespace names are only compared for equality, they are never dereferenced. The problem is that the SVG file in question uses both DTD and namespaces, which are known not to play well together. (There might an libxml2 bug involved here too, I'm not sure.) Anywhere, here's how to fix the SVG: 1) apt-get install libxml2-utils sgml-data 2) xmllint --noent openlogo.svg openlogo-fixed.svg (Yes it's noent, not to be confused with nonet.) 3) Optionally, remove the DTD declaration from the resulting file. -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130124164812.ga5...@jwilk.net
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
* Jakub Wilk jw...@debian.org, 2013-01-24, 17:48: here's how to fix the SVG: 1) apt-get install libxml2-utils sgml-data 2) xmllint --noent openlogo.svg openlogo-fixed.svg (Yes it's noent, not to be confused with nonet.) 3) Optionally, remove the DTD declaration from the resulting file. The last two steps could be merged into one: xmllint --dropdtd --noent openlogo.svg openlogo-fixed.svg -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130124171737.ga5...@jwilk.net
Re: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
[ CC: debian-...@lists.debian.org ] Greetings Jakub, On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 06:17:37PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: * Jakub Wilk jw...@debian.org, 2013-01-24, 17:48: here's how to fix the SVG: 1) apt-get install libxml2-utils sgml-data 2) xmllint --noent openlogo.svg openlogo-fixed.svg (Yes it's noent, not to be confused with nonet.) 3) Optionally, remove the DTD declaration from the resulting file. The last two steps could be merged into one: xmllint --dropdtd --noent openlogo.svg openlogo-fixed.svg That did the trick ! Thanks a lot. In fact I had set out to remove the DTD manually, but my first attempts failed. I can see that the DTD specif went away in the fixed file. For what it's worth, there is still some adobe-specific metadata cruft that can be removed with no harm apparently: metadata variableSets xmlns=http://ns.adobe.com/Variables/1.0/; variableSet varSetName=binding1 locked=none variables/ v:sampleDataSets xmlns=http://ns.adobe.com/GenericCustomNamespace/1.0/; xmlns:v=http://ns.adobe.com/Variables/1.0// /variableSet /variableSets sfw xmlns=http://ns.adobe.com/SaveForWeb/1.0/; slices/ sliceSourceBounds y=322.867 x=251 width=108.758 height=144.133 bottomLeftOrigin=true/ /sfw /metadata Attached to this mail is a version saved with inkscape and edited to remove any reference to adobe. This new file loads fine in Inkscape, The Gimp, Iceweasel and... GNU Emacs! Maybe the folks at debian-...@lists.debian.org might want to give it a test and replace the old file with this one? Anyhow I now have my Debian logo for my slides! Thanks all for helping with this issue. Cheers, Filippo -- Filippo Rusconi, PhD - public crypto key C78F687C @ pgp.mit.edu Researcher at CNRS and Debian Developer lopi...@debian.org Author of ``massXpert'' at http://www.massxpert.org attachment: openlogo-fixed-save-by-inkscape.svg
Bug#698872: Debian logo svg file is not loadable in Inkscape
Package: www.debian.org [ reporting this as a bug ] Heya, Filippo Rusconi discovered the .svg of the Debian logo is not loadable in (some versions of) Inkscape. With the help of Jakub Wilk, the .svg has been fixed and it's attached to this mail. Can you please update the published version, when you get around it? See quoted mailed below, and corresponding thread on -devel [1], for more information. Thanks for maintaining www.d.o! Cheers. [1]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/01/msg00532.html On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 06:44:13PM +0100, Filippo Rusconi wrote: Greetings Jakub, On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 06:17:37PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: * Jakub Wilk jw...@debian.org, 2013-01-24, 17:48: here's how to fix the SVG: 1) apt-get install libxml2-utils sgml-data 2) xmllint --noent openlogo.svg openlogo-fixed.svg (Yes it's noent, not to be confused with nonet.) 3) Optionally, remove the DTD declaration from the resulting file. The last two steps could be merged into one: xmllint --dropdtd --noent openlogo.svg openlogo-fixed.svg That did the trick ! Thanks a lot. In fact I had set out to remove the DTD manually, but my first attempts failed. I can see that the DTD specif went away in the fixed file. For what it's worth, there is still some adobe-specific metadata cruft that can be removed with no harm apparently: metadata variableSets xmlns=http://ns.adobe.com/Variables/1.0/; variableSet varSetName=binding1 locked=none variables/ v:sampleDataSets xmlns=http://ns.adobe.com/GenericCustomNamespace/1.0/; xmlns:v=http://ns.adobe.com/Variables/1.0// /variableSet /variableSets sfw xmlns=http://ns.adobe.com/SaveForWeb/1.0/; slices/ sliceSourceBounds y=322.867 x=251 width=108.758 height=144.133 bottomLeftOrigin=true/ /sfw /metadata Attached to this mail is a version saved with inkscape and edited to remove any reference to adobe. This new file loads fine in Inkscape, The Gimp, Iceweasel and... GNU Emacs! Maybe the folks at debian-...@lists.debian.org might want to give it a test and replace the old file with this one? Anyhow I now have my Debian logo for my slides! Thanks all for helping with this issue. Cheers, Filippo -- Filippo Rusconi, PhD - public crypto key C78F687C @ pgp.mit.edu Researcher at CNRS and Debian Developer lopi...@debian.org Author of ``massXpert'' at http://www.massxpert.org -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » attachment: openlogo-fixed-save-by-inkscape.svg signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: A dream of the Debian-logo
This picture is a dream of the Debian-logo in the future... For the record, while I don't dislike the e = modern swirl idea, the font (typeface?) of the rest of the letters is just awful for a logo (because it's one of the common ones whose name I don't know). HTH, -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for that rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. -- Erwin Knoll -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: A dream of the Debian-logo
On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 08:18:18PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: This picture is a dream of the Debian-logo in the future... For the record, while I don't dislike the e = modern swirl idea, the font (typeface?) of the rest of the letters is just awful for a logo (because it's one of the common ones whose name I don't know). It looks to me like Helvetica[0], which is one of the 14 standard PostScript fonts. [0] Or Nimbus Sans L, which is basically the same thing. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 713 440 7475 | http://crustytoothpaste.ath.cx/~bmc | My opinion only troff on top of XML: http://crustytoothpaste.ath.cx/~bmc/code/thwack OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
A dream of the Debian-logo
This picture is a dream of the Debian-logo in the future... attachment: debian_next_generation_t2.png
Re: A dream of the Debian-logo
On Saturday 07 June 2008 11:44:42 József Makay wrote: This picture is a dream of the Debian-logo in the future... Very cool looking! -- Wesley J. Landaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094 0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: A dream of the Debian-logo
It's a very nice picture, but I guess maybe it would belong more to somewhere like DebianArt [1] than to this mailing list. Greetings, Miry [1] http://www.debianart.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: A dream of the Debian-logo
Hi, I do think so that its a really nice picture , but one of my suggestion is can't you create e in Circle/Spiral way. that is my personal opinion ,your work is extremely good. On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 12:39 AM, Miriam Ruiz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a very nice picture, but I guess maybe it would belong more to somewhere like DebianArt [1] than to this mailing list. Greetings, Miry [1] http://www.debianart.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Deepak Tripathi E3 71V3 8Y C063 (We Live By Code) http://deepkatripathi.blogspot.com
Re: A dream of the Debian-logo
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Deepak Tripathi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I do think so that its a really nice picture , but one of my suggestion is can't you create e in Circle/Spiral way. that is my personal opinion ,your work is extremely good. On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 12:39 AM, Miriam Ruiz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a very nice picture, but I guess maybe it would belong more to somewhere like DebianArt [1] than to this mailing list. Greetings, Miry [1] http://www.debianart.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Deepak Tripathi E3 71V3 8Y C063 (We Live By Code) http://deepkatripathi.blogspot.com Is like a greca maya! good work. -- Atte ItZtLi ¤º°°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ Nahui Tonalli Icniuhtli. ¤º°°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[OT] TeX font of Debian Logo?
Hi, it's surely off topic here but I don't know which is the relevant list ... Does anybody know whether there is a TeX font which is equal or at least very similar to the font used in our Logo http://www.debian.org/logos/ ? I would need to scale the Debian text and add a -Med behind Debian. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] TeX font of Debian Logo?
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 03:46:20PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: Does anybody know whether there is a TeX font which is equal or at least very similar to the font used in our Logo I've never seen a Debian-ish TeX font. Do you only need the Debian logo in your TeX document? Then a far more promising plan is to embed the PostScript version of the logo as a picture. Cheers, Richard -- __ _ |_) /| Richard Atterer | GnuPG key: | \/¯| http://atterer.net | 0x888354F7 ¯ '` ¯ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] TeX font of Debian Logo?
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Richard Atterer wrote: Do you only need the Debian logo in your TeX document? Then a far more promising plan is to embed the PostScript version of the logo as a picture. No, as I said I want to have the String Debian-Med and I need the M. I could build the other letters using Gimp, but it would be nice to have the real font. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] TeX font of Debian Logo?
Andreas Tille schrieb am Donnerstag, 07. Juli 2005 um 15:46:20 +0200: Hi, it's surely off topic here but I don't know which is the relevant list ... Does anybody know whether there is a TeX font which is equal or at least very similar to the font used in our Logo http://www.debian.org/logos/ ? http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianLogo or google for debian logo font : first match was a msg from Alfi: http://lists.debian.org/debian-www/2003/08/msg00261.html -- Jörg Friedrich There are only 10 types of people: Those who understand binary and those who don't. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] TeX font of Debian Logo?
Joerg Friedrich schrieb am Donnerstag, 07. Juli 2005 um 16:17:39 +0200: http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianLogo or google for debian logo font : first match was a msg from Alfi: http://lists.debian.org/debian-www/2003/08/msg00261.html btw. the i-dot seems to be manually replaced by a (red) diamond. -- Jörg Friedrich There are only 10 types of people: Those who understand binary and those who don't. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] TeX font of Debian Logo?
Ok, last mail: searching the lists: the logo was created by Raul M. Silva. http://www.debian.org/News/1999/19990826 Maybe you could ask him, if he can create a Debian-Med logo for you. (http://www.silva.com / mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) I try to put this information on wiki.debian.net, if I manage to learn howto create a wiki account :-) -- Jörg Friedrich There are only 10 types of people: Those who understand binary and those who don't. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] TeX font of Debian Logo?
Joerg Friedrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anybody know whether there is a TeX font which is equal or at least very similar to the font used in our Logo http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianLogo It's actuall Poppl Laudatio *Condensed*. See the Berthold site for more information on the font (referenced in Alfi's mail below). or google for debian logo font : first match was a msg from Alfi: http://lists.debian.org/debian-www/2003/08/msg00261.html A ressembling free (as in beer) TTF font can be found here: http://www.flyerstarter.com/Free-Fonts/L/Laudatio-C.html (although the page seems broken -- if you want the file, mail me) btw. the i-dot seems to be manually replaced by a (red) diamond. I can confirm. Also the string debian has been horizontally condensed a little bit more than the original font is, and stretch a bit vertically. JB. -- Julien BLACHE - Debian GNU/Linux Developer - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Public key available on http://www.jblache.org - KeyID: F5D6 5169 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: origins of the Debian logo
On Fri, 2004-12-31 at 15:18 +0100, Hanspeter Kunz wrote: On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 18:01 +0100, martin f krafft wrote: Hi all! In the process of completion of my book (http://debianbook.info), I have one more question. Unfortunately, I am on a shitty GSM link right now and the available (crippled) means of research have not been able to produce an answer to the following: Where does the Debian Swirl come from? What does it try to symbolise? Was (partly) answered on debian-user some days ago: http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2004/12/msg03402.html After digging a bit more, I found the following post: http://lists.userlinux.com/pipermail/discuss/2004-March/004625.html --- I quote: - It's magic smoke. Electrical engineer lore is that when you burn out an electronic component, you cause the magic smoke that makes it work to be released. Once the magic smoke is gone, the component doesn't work any longer. Debian is supposed to be the magic smoke that makes your computer work. Thanks Bruce [Perens] --- end of quote - Shouldn't this explanation go to www.debian.org/logos/ ? cheers, Hp. -- Hanspeter Kunz Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Ph.D. Student Department of Information Technology Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] University of Zurich Tel: +41.(0)44.63-54306 Andreasstrasse 15, Office 2.12 http://ailab.ch/people/hkunzCH-8050 Zurich, Switzerland Spamtraps: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You can go anywhere you want if you look serious and carry a clipboard. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: origins of the Debian logo
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 11:31:58AM +0200, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: Sorry for the delayed response, but here is a possible answer to the second part of the question from a semiotic perspective. Although the question was what the swirl /tries/ to symbolize, it may be of some interest what it actually might have ended up symbolizing for some people. Fasten seatbelts, please. Some time ago I saw Toy Story for the first time and noticed that Buzz Lightyear has a symbol similar to the Debian swirl in his jaw. It can be seen in these pictures: http://www.bugkid.com/toystory/pictures/011.jpg http://allearsnet.com/tp/mk/buzz7.jpg Knowing the close relation between Debian and Toy Story, it seems likely this was a source of inspiration for the swirl artist. -- Niklas Vainio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: origins of the Debian logo
On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 18:01 +0100, martin f krafft wrote: In the process of completion of my book (http://debianbook.info), I have one more question. Unfortunately, I am on a shitty GSM link right now and the available (crippled) means of research have not been able to produce an answer to the following: Where does the Debian Swirl come from? What does it try to symbolise? Sorry for the delayed response, but here is a possible answer to the second part of the question from a semiotic perspective. Although the question was what the swirl /tries/ to symbolize, it may be of some interest what it actually might have ended up symbolizing for some people. Fasten seatbelts, please. The mirror image, or inversion, of the above entry [clockwise spiral] symbolizes, like that ideogram, /rotation/. It stands first and foremost for a /counterclockwise rotation/ and is therefore related to [counterclockwise swastika]. This sign appeared in the Euphrates cultures as early as around 2000 B.C., and [counterclockwise spiral] is an Egyptian hieroglyph for /thread/ or /measurement/. [Angled counterclockwise spiral] was used in the earliest Chinese ideography with the probable meaning /return/ or /homecoming/. The Hopi Indians seem to have given it the same meaning. [...] The sign was used by the Phenicians and as a pattern on Bronze Age jewelry found in Scania, Sweden, dating back to about 1300 B.C. Compare with the hieroglyph [straight-line spiral with four angles], representing /Egypt/, i.e., that country that one /returns to/, the /homeland/. There is a similar usage in the English system of hobo signs: a /good house for work/, i.e., a place that is worth returning to when one needs food and money. The sign [somewhat straightened spiral] is found painted on the walls of houses in Tibet [...] and has perhaps the meaning /home/, the place one returns to. It can also signify /whirlpool/ or /eddy/ on nautical charts. (Liungman, Carl G.: Dictionary of Symbols, W. W. Norton Company Ltd, 1991 (English translation of original from 1974)) Had the spiral been a clockwise spiral, it would have signified water, power, independent movement and outgoing migration of tribes, as well as potential power, potential movement, or, in a more modern setting, spin drying. Both the clockwise and anticlockwise spirals share some common meanings. The nautical signs mentioned above are one example. In comic strips, they signify rage, pain and curses and are often accompanied by swastikas, exclamation marks, and other symbols of wrath and surprise. Finally, both [clockwise spiral] and [anticlockwise spiral] have been used by alchemists for /horse dung/. Go figure. All quotes from Liungman (see above) and apologies for the missing pictures, but honestly you do not want me to try these in ASCII... -- Fabian Fagerholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Yet Another Debian logo buttons
Hello. I've influenced by Mr. Craig Small's and created yet another Debian logo buttons. (csmall's are at http://www.debian.org/~csmall/). I put mine at http://www.debian.org/~kitame/ How about this? Thanks. -- Takuo Kitame [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: APRIS GNU/LINUX EXPO UPDATES. (need debian Logo).
Jeff Teunissen wrote: Speaking of the open use logo, was it intentional or an unintentional artifact of the conversion from EPS to xfig that changed the shape of the letters and the logo itself? Unintentional, I think. I have .ps files with the correct shapes, and have sent them to the web team, but nothings been done yet. -- see shy jo
Re: APRIS GNU/LINUX EXPO UPDATES. (need debian Logo).
Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Frederic CELLA wrote: can i send to them ? (this one the fisrt page of www.debian.org) The webpage has a postscript version of the logo iirc. This should make it trivial for them to produce a 300dpi logo (or whatever other resolution they desire). Speaking of the open use logo, was it intentional or an unintentional artifact of the conversion from EPS to xfig that changed the shape of the letters and the logo itself? I find that raul's original logos seem to have much nicer shapes, particularly that of the Swirl itself. The xfig conversions have a strange bulge in the lower-left quadraint, and the letters have more quared-off corners to them. For example, compare http://www.debian.org/logos/ with http://dusknet.dhis.org/~deek/debian/ -- In the latter page, the letters were converted from Raul's EPS to Gimp XCF directly. Note: The color change to the darker red was my doing, but nothing else has been changed -- I still have original-colored pristine EPS and XCF sources, if anyone wants them. -- | Jeff Teunissen -- President, Dusk To Dawn Computing -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Disclaimer: I am my employer, so anything I say goes for me too. :) | dusknet.ddns.org is a black hole for email.Use my Reply-To address. | Specializing in Debian GNU/Linux http://dusknet.dhis.org/~deek/
APRIS GNU/LINUX EXPO UPDATES. (need debian Logo).
They publish next week a magazine. they need 300DPI DEBIAN LOGO. can i send to them ? (this one the fisrt page of www.debian.org) if problem email to me. if not. i sen d to them this friday. bst regards. Frederic.
Re: APRIS GNU/LINUX EXPO UPDATES. (need debian Logo).
On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 12:59:40 +, Frederic CELLA wrote: They publish next week a magazine. they need 300DPI DEBIAN LOGO. At http://www.debian.org/logos/ you can find the logos as xfig source and as postscript. (Use ghostscript to produce the logo in your favourite bitmap format at your favourite resolution). That page also contains the licensing information; the open logo should be fine. HTH, Ray -- LEADERSHIP A form of self-preservation exhibited by people with auto- destructive imaginations in order to ensure that when it comes to the crunch it'll be someone else's bones which go crack and not their own. - The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
Re: APRIS GNU/LINUX EXPO UPDATES. (need debian Logo).
* Frederic == Frederic CELLA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frederic They publish next week a magazine. they need 300DPI DEBIAN Frederic LOGO. can i send to them ? (this one the fisrt page of Frederic www.debian.org) Check out http://www.debian.org/logos/. They can use the open use logo, the postscript version will be best for them. Ciao, Martin
Re: APRIS GNU/LINUX EXPO UPDATES. (need debian Logo).
Previously Frederic CELLA wrote: can i send to them ? (this one the fisrt page of www.debian.org) The webpage has a postscript version of the logo iirc. This should make it trivial for them to produce a 300dpi logo (or whatever other resolution they desire). Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpyuVmnyrgO0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: The Debian Logo-team
On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 10:02:18PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote: After getting a few volunteers and asking a few other people I present to you the Debian logo-team, who will select the best logos for your voting pleasure: * Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Teemu Hukkanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Nils Lohner [EMAIL PROTECTED] * James Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] * M. Vernon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not to sound put off by this, just wondering on what criteria you selected the team. Considering I offered to help, and the fact that I have a strong background in desktop publishing and web design (strong, as in 8 years working experience) I would have thought my knowledge to have been useful. Ben (who isn't getting an attitude, just wanting clarification) -- --- - - --- - - - --- Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux UnixGroup Admin - Jordan Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- - - - --- --- -- The Choice of the GNU Generation
Re: The Debian Logo-team
On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 07:40:28PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: * Nils Lohner [EMAIL PROTECTED] * James Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, these guys are obvious... Nils has done a *great* job at getting lots of Debian press releases out there, and James is our webmaster. -- David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org
Re: The Debian Logo-team
Previously Ben Collins wrote: Not to sound put off by this, just wondering on what criteria you selected the team. Considering I offered to help, and the fact that I have a strong background in desktop publishing and web design (strong, as in 8 years working experience) I would have thought my knowledge to have been useful. I used a simple selection method: people I asked since I felt they should be in there (Nils and James), and people who volunteered and had a good explanation of why they felt they could contribute. Finally 5 people sounded like a nice number. I indeed asked around on irc a bit if people were interested in this and you said you we were to help out, but you never answered my question why you would make a good choice. So I didn't know about your background in publishing and web design. I'm willing to step out and let you take my place though, since it seems you have much more knowledge about good logos then I do. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpyGX0qSBo6J.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: The Debian Logo-team
On Fri, Jan 29, 1999 at 02:33:11AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote: I indeed asked around on irc a bit if people were interested in this and you said you we were to help out, but you never answered my question why you would make a good choice. So I didn't know about your background in publishing and web design. I'm willing to step out and let you take my place though, since it seems you have much more knowledge about good logos then I do. Actually I did answer, but not in a very serious tone, so I can see how you might think I was not serious about helping. Telling you my background in design was how I volunteered for it on IRC, if you missed that (and considering the noise level in the channel at the time, it is very possible), I appologize. Please, don't step out on my account, I'm sure your reasons for choosing who you did were very well founded, and I'm not about to accept the offer simply because I whined about it, but thanks, and sorry for any misunderstanding. -- --- - - --- - - - --- Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux UnixGroup Admin - Jordan Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- - - - --- --- -- The Choice of the GNU Generation
The Debian Logo-team
After getting a few volunteers and asking a few other people I present to you the Debian logo-team, who will select the best logos for your voting pleasure: * Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Teemu Hukkanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Nils Lohner [EMAIL PROTECTED] * James Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] * M. Vernon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Besides our own personal taste we will use the following criteria to select the best logos: * easily recognizable * must look good in black white * must be scalable * not too detailed so it works in low resolution * works both with and without text at the bottom (can be ignore if the text `Debian' is part of the logo) Of course an important item is: what exactly constitutes a logo? Bruce Perens gave the following description of a logo once (Nov 1997): I think it's important to look at a logo for a very short time without any prejudice (less than 1/2 second), and then think to yourself what did I see?. The immediate answer should be the debian logo. It should not be confused with anything else like two letters, the Tux the penguin, etc. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpxDZ6mi7qdv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 07:26:19AM -, Robert Woodcock wrote: Avery Pennarun wrote: What if someone gets hold of the Linux kernel and uses it to guide nuclear missiles? (Well, at least they have to share their changes with us :)) Only if they distribute the control systems : You've forgotten something. The military act as if they are above any laws. (If they cared about obeying laws, they would be disarming nuclear weapons under their international treaty obligations) Sorry to be political. Andrew
Debian logo contest, step 2
I just got word back from Sven Riedel, the guy in charge of organizing gimp contests. He was happy with our request, and was willing to organize the whole thing. The contest will start in februari, after the current contest (dreams) ends. Details and submissions will be at the usual site: http://contest.gimp.org/ . Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgp8afAJShCZn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian logo contest, step 2
On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote: I just got word back from Sven Riedel, the guy in charge of organizing gimp contests. He was happy with our request, and was willing to organize the whole thing. The contest will start in februari, after the current contest (dreams) ends. Details and submissions will be at the usual site: http://contest.gimp.org/ . What exactly has been asked for? Matthew -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steward of the Cambridge Tolkien Society Selwyn College Computer Support http://www.cam.ac.uk/CambUniv/Societies/tolkien/ http://pick.sel.cam.ac.uk/
Way, way off-topic was: Re: Debian logo its license
Andrew writes: You've forgotten something. The military act as if they are above any laws. (If they cared about obeying laws, they would be disarming nuclear weapons under their international treaty obligations) On the contrary. The military, at least in the US and the UK, act in accordance with the laws of their respective nations, which require them to obey the civilian governments. It is those governments, not the military, that are signatories to treaties (not that I know of any that require nuclear disarmament). -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Re: Way, way off-topic was: Re: Debian logo its license
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 10:33:30AM -0600, John Hasler wrote: You've forgotten something. The military act as if they are above any laws. (If they cared about obeying laws, they would be disarming nuclear weapons under their international treaty obligations) On the contrary. The military, at least in the US and the UK, act in accordance with the laws of their respective nations, which require them to obey the civilian governments. It is those governments, not the military, that are signatories to treaties (not that I know of any that require nuclear disarmament). Just keep telling yourself that.. = -- I'm working in the dark here. Yeah well rumor has it you do your best work in the dark. -- Earth: Final Conflict
Re: Possible GIMP contest for new Debian logo
Sorry, this probably belongs on -devel... I'll post it there too. About the design, I personally like the penguin for Debian GNU/Linux, have something similar for Hurd (meaning a red profile of a GNU head or something) and something different (maybe plain nice graphical text? There was a nice one in the previous set of submissions...) for the Debian one. Nils. In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nils Lohner writes : Actually, one more 'real' point in this discussion... we should really have 3 logos. One for Debian (the project), one for Debian GNU/Linux, and one for Debian GNU/Hurd... the Debian one should symbolize the project, and the other two should be somehow related to it and/or each other. Debian is not just Linux anymore, at least not since Hurd came along, just like Linux isn't just i386 any more. Just a few cents worth of thoughts (at a penny apiece, that's a few! :) Nils.
Re: Debian logo its license
Andrew G . Feinberg writes: Why in the world do we need to license something as trivial as a _logo_? I wrote: We don't. Darren Benham writes: Of course we do. Otherwise we'd have to grant permission to every tom-dick-harry that wanted to use it in any way-shape-form. I meant, of course, that we don't need an elaborate specially written license with elaborate restrictions. Debian grants permission to every tom-dick-harry that wants to use this logo in any way-shape-form would be quite adequate. Or don't license it: just use it on Debian stuff and grant individual licenses on a case by case basis. I doubt that you will be swamped by all the requests. What does FreeBSD do about their logo (or mascot, or whatever)? -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 06:20:49PM -0600, John Hasler wrote: Or don't license it: just use it on Debian stuff and grant individual licenses on a case by case basis. I doubt that you will be swamped by all the requests. I'm glad to see you volunteer to take respond to requests that come in and check up that they are using the logo in a responsible way. Even with the existing license (and a valid expiry date) I have probably handled 20 requests for use of the logo in the last 6 months. I will be rather happy to see a permanent license in place. Jay Treacy
Re: Debian logo its license
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 10:35:50PM -0600, Andrew G . Feinberg wrote: Larry Ewing and Tux. You don't see him writing a license, do you? The picture of Tux is licensed freely for any use as long as Larry Ewing is mentioned. Don't know about modification, though. On http://www.isc.tamu.edu/~lewing/linux/index.html, it states Permission to use and/or modify this image is granted provided you acknowledge me [EMAIL PROTECTED] and The GIMP if someone asks. Andrew Dvorak. Experience is the worst teacher; you fail the test first and learn the instructions afterwards. --Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
Re: Debian logo its license
James A. Treacy writes: Even with the existing license (and a valid expiry date) I have probably handled 20 requests for use of the logo in the last 6 months. Doesn't seem like many considering that the present license encourages requests. Do you really think that forty people a year would enquire about using a logo which has not been offered to them? I will be rather happy to see a permanent license in place. Fine. Propose one and I'll second the motion and vote for it. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI
Re: Debian logo its license
Jonathan P Tomer wrote: is the name debian a registered trademark? I think so. if it is, wouldn't it be sensible to do the same for the logo? I agree. I think trademarking the logo will allow us to prevent misuse and at the same time allow us to give it a DFSG-free copyright. -- see shy jo
Re: Debian logo its license
All: Please pardon my non-developer comment, but one thing about the license has bothered me for a while, and I've seen no else bring it up: Do we really want to limit the maximum size of an entity that can display the license? Points 2, 3, 4 of the license state, roughly, that you may not display the logo unless half of the entity (software, info, or service) must be related to or derived from Debian. Thus any product, or service organization, large enough to comprise all of Debian plus that amount of something else plus one bit, can no longer use the logo. So, Walnut Creek's FTP server (cdrom.com) is out of luck. So's the 13-CD release of Linux Developer's Resource, and IBM, c., c., c. (So's Microsoft...hmm, maybe that's the point. :-) Don't we want to specify that if they use the logo, they must include/service/know about/deal with _at_least_half_of_Debian_? That way, anyone displaying the logo is fairly clueful about us, but not inherently limited in the amount of what they can offer. Fading back into the shadows... Max Hyre Don't bother cc:ing me---I'll get it out of the mailing-list archives tomorrow night...
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 03:37:57AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: to either of these animals. We have our own message, too. We are constructors. We take the work of thousands of people and put them together. Shouldn't this be reflected by the logo, too? You mean like a penguin wearing a hard hat?
Debian logo its license
For the Nth time our logo license has expired. It might be a good idea to finally finalize the license instead of just extending its lifetime every couple of months. There has also been mention of people wanting a different logo. I think we should stick to our current logo for several reasons though: * it is a good logo: it's easily recognizable, simple to draw, scales good and looks good in both blackwhite and in colour. * choosing a new logo will take a long time: we would have to get submissions, vote on them all over again, etc. * I actually like the thing :) I propose that we vote on accepting both the logo and the current license. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpK8rOeLo9gd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian logo its license
Hi, On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 12:52:12AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote: There has also been mention of people wanting a different logo. I think we should stick to our current logo for several reasons though: * it is a good logo: it's easily recognizable, simple to draw, scales good and looks good in both blackwhite and in colour. I agree it is a good logo in the sense that it fulfills all technical requirements for a logo. But IMHO it is a bad logo for the following reasons: * It is a penguin (even if some think it's a chicken). A penguin is already the Linux logo, are we only capable of plagiarism, or are we up to the task and have an identity of our own? * A penguin is submitting the wrong message in some other way, too: The Debian GNU/Hurd port is coming along quite nicely, and although it uses some linux driver code, it is quite different from Linux in several aspects. Debian is the distribution with most ports, and even non-Linux ports, too, now. Do we really want to restrict ourselves and our image to Linux for an uncertain period of time? * The logo was imposed on the developers. We now have a formalilzation of decision making, the constitution. It should be applied to this (partly) political decision. * Let's show some *taste* :) * choosing a new logo will take a long time: we would have to get submissions, vote on them all over again, etc. First, I don't think it would take too long. Secondly, do we really want to rush this important issue? About getting submissions: I think a Gimp contest would be appropriate, this would lead to better contributions. Christians Logo pages failed because there was hardly any Logo among the entries. The people contributing to a Gimp contest know about good design and requirements for a logo. Check the Gnome logo, it was the winner of a Gimp contest, too. I don't understand all over again. We have never voted on a logo. * I actually like the thing :) Oh. I propose that we vote on accepting both the logo and the current license. Why intermix these two issues? Choosing a license and choosing a logo are completely different pair of shoes. They can be voted on seperately. Thanks, Marcus -- Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.Debian GNU/Linuxfinger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.orgmaster.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Re: Debian logo its license
Wichert Akkerman wrote: I propose that we vote on accepting both the logo and the current license. I very much dislike the current license. I'm a debian developer, I'd like to put the debian logo on my home page, but I do *not* necessarily want to devote half or more of my home page to debian. I'd rather have pointers to the debian web site, and let debian speak for itself. Current (expired) license forbids this. I've previously raised issues about using the logo inside of packages too -- this one may be addressed by the current license, but it's certainly not clear. The logo should be a logo, it should be used to refer to or to advertise debian. It should *mean* debian. The current license isn't even *close* to filling this goal, imo. I asked on IRC about the logo license, and was basically told, nobody cares, if we ignore the problem it will go away. A deplorable attitude, IMO, license issues are at the core of what debian is all about. The thread on -legal ends with a comment that we should take this up after revising the dfsg. I disagree *strongly*. We have free software guidelines -- some of us even feel that the ones we have are much better than any of the proposals so far. We *don't* have a reasonable license for the logo. It may not be quite as critical, but I feel it's more urgent at the moment. Debian is a free project to distribute a free OS. It should have a free logo. FREE THE LOGO!! FREE THE LOGO!! :-) cheers -- Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I have a truly elegant proof of the or[EMAIL PROTECTED] | above, but it is too long to fit into http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
RE: Debian logo its license
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On 23-Jan-99 Wichert Akkerman wrote: I propose that we vote on accepting both the logo and the current license. The current license? Are you sure? It needs to be rewritten if for no other reason but to remove the expiration date. = * http://benham.net/index.html * * * -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- ---* *Darren Benham * Version: 3.1 * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++ P+++$ L++* * KC7YAQ * E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- * * Debian Developer * PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b DI+++ D++ * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * G++G+++ e h+ r* y+* * * --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- ---* = -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNqp8C7bps1lIfUYBAQE92gQArR9qDHk+Fy/9PUPLak5/WtqDKYg2iK+s IAHj5y7qDzqQO8NdT1pKJcGcEH5xCwcR9LLmofO7a9SOzKR2WWgyikcIUzs5cTye A0fcVE0KFe48xBWwfkwG989vsx/sfTA3853TvPBwmtM3Psh+x8XTSvfJZg8fOz6J Rx44B1xdp2A= =CDpd -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Debian logo its license
Previously Darren Benham wrote: The current license? Are you sure? It needs to be rewritten if for no other reason but to remove the expiration date. Okay, so I should have read the license before posting that :). Should we change anything besides removing the expiration date? So far nobody has commented on that. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpehinuPGf1R.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote: I propose that we vote on accepting both the logo and the current license. I think this is a good idea. If this proposal needs to be seconded, consider this my seconded!. If it needs to be seconded somewhere else (debian-vote?) i'll do so there :) -ed
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 04:21:37PM -0800, Chris Waters wrote: Debian is a free project to distribute a free OS. It should have a free logo. FREE THE LOGO!! FREE THE LOGO!! :-) And what if some anti-debian people get ahold of the logo and use it for evil purposes? -- Stephen Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] -* Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for my public key. PGP#22714B25 *-
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Chris Waters wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: I propose that we vote on accepting both the logo and the current license. I very much dislike the current license. I'm a debian developer, I'd like to put the debian logo on my home page, but I do *not* necessarily want to devote half or more of my home page to debian. I'd rather have pointers to the debian web site, and let debian speak for itself. Current (expired) license forbids this. I've previously raised issues about using the logo inside of packages too -- this one may be addressed by the current license, but it's certainly not clear. The logo should be a logo, it should be used to refer to or to advertise debian. It should *mean* debian. The current license isn't even *close* to filling this goal, imo. [snip] Debian is a free project to distribute a free OS. It should have a free logo. FREE THE LOGO!! FREE THE LOGO!! :-) well then, that's all the more reason to have a vote, imho. i personally dislike the logo and agree with you about the license. since there are enough people raising concerns about the logo, i think a vote is warranted. what do you think? -ed
RE: Debian logo its license
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Darren Benham wrote: On 23-Jan-99 Wichert Akkerman wrote: I propose that we vote on accepting both the logo and the current license. The current license? Are you sure? It needs to be rewritten if for no other reason but to remove the expiration date. Note that the proposal is to vote *on* the license logo, not necessarily *for* it. -ed
Re: Debian logo its license
Previously Chris Waters wrote: Debian is a free project to distribute a free OS. It should have a free logo. FREE THE LOGO!! FREE THE LOGO!! :-) Agreed. Shall we move the logo license discussion to debian-legal and rewrite it there? Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpQ5YEMrbHaR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian logo its license
Previously Marcus Brinkmann wrote: * It is a penguin (even if some think it's a chicken). A penguin is already the Linux logo, are we only capable of plagiarism, or are we up to the task and have an identity of our own? Heh, nobody seems to be able to spot that :) * A penguin is submitting the wrong message in some other way, too: The Debian GNU/Hurd port is coming along quite nicely, and although it uses some linux driver code, it is quite different from Linux in several aspects. Debian is the distribution with most ports, and even non-Linux ports, too, now. Do we really want to restrict ourselves and our image to Linux for an uncertain period of time? No, but since almost nobody seems to see the current logo is actually a penguin I didn't really worry about that. It even seemed somewhat appriopriate in that a Debian did begin as a Linux-only distribution. There is no shame in showing your roots imho. * The logo was imposed on the developers. We now have a formalilzation of decision making, the constitution. It should be applied to this (partly) political decision. That's true. It's also true that most favourite `logos' were not good logos. Logo criteria are really important. * Let's show some *taste* :) Heh, that always makes for interesting discussions. I'm quite sure you wouldn't like my taste in music, but I'm really happy with it :) First, I don't think it would take too long. Secondly, do we really want to rush this important issue? Letting hundreds of developers choose one logo in a multitude of submissions sounds like a time-consuming process. We would probably need a scheme to elimiate logo's, then revote, eliminate more, etc. to do it fairly. About getting submissions: I think a Gimp contest would be appropriate, this would lead to better contributions. Iff we decide that we want a new logo, then I agree that would be the best approach. It would also demonstrate how open we are. Christians Logo pages failed because there was hardly any Logo among the entries. Very true. I don't understand all over again. We have never voted on a logo. We did in the sense that people could choose their favourite logo on Christians page. Why intermix these two issues? Choosing a license and choosing a logo are completely different pair of shoes. They can be voted on seperately. Geez, it seems you have issues with everything I said. Looks like I succeeded in starting a discussion again though :). I mixed them because they are closely related: you can't have one without the other.1 Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpNMM8mjsr92.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian logo its license
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On 24-Jan-99 Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Darren Benham wrote: The current license? Are you sure? It needs to be rewritten if for no other reason but to remove the expiration date. Okay, so I should have read the license before posting that :). Should we change anything besides removing the expiration date? So far nobody has commented on that. Wichert. Probably... I don't have time to outline my ideas. I'll get to it later tonight after I get back = * http://benham.net/index.html * * * -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- ---* *Darren Benham * Version: 3.1 * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++ P+++$ L++* * KC7YAQ * E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- * * Debian Developer * PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b DI+++ D++ * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * G++G+++ e h+ r* y+* * * --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- ---* = -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNqqPqbbps1lIfUYBAQH+lgP+J1cUfSksGMsmfvWVFfbutRl9Sv+fJdYE mzj6qf1ZaJa8o/y1F8zAq+4w9P72GNeHtEORlPI3Ywcd1kChPh/bfnXkJVCYMNxk FerHnnz1t4TazQNmAeebw2bDZ+7/FXgJxowKQJFTGVqqsu2qNifMffG8Xr5vC/2q /ZUIRsIiDfw= =aWyg -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Debian logo its license
Hi, On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 02:54:14AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Marcus Brinkmann wrote: * It is a penguin (even if some think it's a chicken). A penguin is already the Linux logo, are we only capable of plagiarism, or are we up to the task and have an identity of our own? Heh, nobody seems to be able to spot that :) Despite your funny comment I think this is a very serious concern. Debian is independent enough from both GNU, and Linux, that the Logo should not refer to either of these animals. We have our own message, too. We are constructors. We take the work of thousands of people and put them together. Shouldn't this be reflected by the logo, too? * A penguin is submitting the wrong message in some other way, too: The Debian GNU/Hurd port is coming along quite nicely, and although it uses some linux driver code, it is quite different from Linux in several aspects. Debian is the distribution with most ports, and even non-Linux ports, too, now. Do we really want to restrict ourselves and our image to Linux for an uncertain period of time? No, but since almost nobody seems to see the current logo is actually a penguin I didn't really worry about that. It even seemed somewhat appriopriate in that a Debian did begin as a Linux-only distribution. There is no shame in showing your roots imho. Certainly there isn't. But isn't GNU our real root? Think about it, and then let's drop this idea about GNU, Linux or GNU/Linux. It is not appropriate. To avoid confusion, something independent would be favourable. This is also to make Debian a community. We need something to identify each other, to seperate us from the whole Linux movement, as a distinct entity _inside_ it. This is not an unfriendly seperation, don't get me wrong. Just something that shows: here starts and ends Debian, the best free operating system. If someone identifies it as a chicken or not is irrelevant. In the context, everyone will admit that it is meant to be a penguin. * The logo was imposed on the developers. We now have a formalilzation of decision making, the constitution. It should be applied to this (partly) political decision. That's true. It's also true that most favourite `logos' were not good logos. Logo criteria are really important. Yes. This is why I am not sure that voting is the right way to choose a logo. Probably a group of elected persons should make the decision, and only the decision gets ratified. Probably this group should elect a couple (two or three) and the vote should be among them. * Let's show some *taste* :) Heh, that always makes for interesting discussions. I'm quite sure you wouldn't like my taste in music, but I'm really happy with it :) Hehe. But still: The logo could be improved. This is certainly a personal opinion only, but ask yourself what image the Logo will put on Debian. Will CD vendors use the logo on the Debian CD? Is it professional enough? If nobody uses the logo because it is ugly, then we can choose whatever logo we want. It will be pretty useless, though. Note that we can't do much marketing on our own, so we can't promote our logo=image ourselve. We have to rely on third party vendors. Because we make free software, we can't enforce our logo. If we choose a good logo, though, people will like to see it, and vendors will use it. Until yet, I still have to see a CD/magazine whatever which uses Chicken Blue Eye. First, I don't think it would take too long. Secondly, do we really want to rush this important issue? Letting hundreds of developers choose one logo in a multitude of submissions sounds like a time-consuming process. We would probably need a scheme to elimiate logo's, then revote, eliminate more, etc. to do it fairly. I think this is the wrong approach. See above for an alternate proposal. We could vote that a small group of interested people investigate the entries and pick some winners. Among the small elected number, the rest of the developers could vote on. About getting submissions: I think a Gimp contest would be appropriate, this would lead to better contributions. Iff we decide that we want a new logo, then I agree that would be the best approach. It would also demonstrate how open we are. Ok. I don't understand all over again. We have never voted on a logo. We did in the sense that people could choose their favourite logo on Christians page. Don't remember of THAT! We have seen what came out of this. Nice CD covers, no logos. It was the wrong approach, and we should learn from the past. We should reckognize that we may not be good artists and designers after all, and leave this to the talented people. Why intermix these two issues? Choosing a license and choosing a logo are completely different pair of shoes. They can be voted on seperately. Geez, it seems you have issues with everything I said. Looks like I succeeded in starting a discussion
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 02:55:56AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote: Agreed. Shall we move the logo license discussion to debian-legal and rewrite it there? Explain: Why in the world do we need to license something as trivial as a _logo_? I havent been a developer for a long time, but it seems to me as a normal person that I dislike excessive legalese. We already split hairs over every little thing, important as it may be. However, I think our time is better spent discussing things other than how to license something that half the people I talk to think is a chicken. Let's see if we want to replace it, then lets _ask_ people who use it to give credit to the designer, like with Larry Ewing and Tux. You don't see him writing a license, do you? Andrew -- Andrew G. Feinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pager: 1-888-950-5050 PIN 6093780 PGP Fingerprint 78 55 2B B4 A7 B2 96 FF 84 BA 4A 3F 23 82 DD 80 (If this is not related in some way to the Debian Project, please direct replies to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999 00:52:12 +0100, Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Wichert [1 text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)] For the Nth Wichert time our logo license has expired. It might be a good idea Wichert to finally finalize the license instead of just extending Wichert its lifetime every couple of months. Wichert There has also been mention of people wanting a different Wichert logo. I think we should stick to our current logo for Wichert several reasons though: Wichert * it is a good logo: it's easily recognizable, simple to Wichert draw, scales good and looks good in both blackwhite and Wichert in colour. Wichert * choosing a new logo will take a long time: we would have Wichert to get submissions, vote on them all over again, etc. Wichert * I actually like the thing :) Wichert I propose that we vote on accepting both the logo and the Wichert current license. Since this seems to be a formal proposal. I second. I'd like to see an end to the issue once and for all. I see two different votes here: 1) A formal logo license that Debian will use. and 2) What we do about the logo (with options a) keep current, b) keep current for some amount of time, c) get new one in some manner). Dres -- @James LewisMoss [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Blessed Be! @http://www.ioa.com/~dres | Linux is kewl! @Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours. Bach
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 07:48:00PM -0600, Stephen Crowley wrote: On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 04:21:37PM -0800, Chris Waters wrote: Debian is a free project to distribute a free OS. It should have a free logo. FREE THE LOGO!! FREE THE LOGO!! :-) And what if some anti-debian people get ahold of the logo and use it for evil purposes? What if someone gets hold of the Linux kernel and uses it to guide nuclear missiles? (Well, at least they have to share their changes with us :)) Seriously, slander is slander, and it's rude, and people will know it when they see it. Furthermore, if people want to parody Debian (including the logo) they'll do so regardless of the logo license, and Debian doesn't have enough money to sue them about it. Besides, did anyone bother to register a trademark? A license that says this logo should only be used when referring specifically to Debian is plenty and probably still unenforceable. Have fun, Avery
Re: Debian logo its license
Avery Pennarun wrote: What if someone gets hold of the Linux kernel and uses it to guide nuclear missiles? (Well, at least they have to share their changes with us :)) Only if they distribute the control systems : Seriously, slander is slander, and it's rude, and people will know it when they see it. Furthermore, if people want to parody Debian (including the logo) they'll do so regardless of the logo license, and Debian doesn't have enough money to sue them about it. Besides, did anyone bother to register a trademark? Aren't parodies specifically allowed under international copyright law? A license that says this logo should only be used when referring specifically to Debian is plenty and probably still unenforceable. Yeah, I don't think it should be more than one sentence. Perhaps: You are licensed to use and distribute modified versions of this logo to refer to or advertise debian. Note that this fails DFSG point #6. I believe this was the original intent. -- Robert Woodcock - [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's like a love-hate relationship, but without the love. -- jwz, on linux
Re: Debian logo its license
Robert Woodcock wrote: You are licensed to use and distribute modified versions of this logo to refer to or advertise debian. Note that this fails DFSG point #6. I believe this was the original intent. We shouldn't license our logo by any license that does not comply with the DFSG. To do so would be hypocritical. Consider: of gnome licensed its logo this way, we would be required by the DFSG to put gnome in non-free or remove its logo from any gnome packages that used it. -- see shy jo
Re: Debian logo its license
Andrew G . Feinberg writes: Why in the world do we need to license something as trivial as a _logo_? We don't. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Re: Debian logo its license
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On 24-Jan-99 Avery Pennarun wrote: On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 07:48:00PM -0600, Stephen Crowley wrote: On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 04:21:37PM -0800, Chris Waters wrote: Debian is a free project to distribute a free OS. It should have a free logo. FREE THE LOGO!! FREE THE LOGO!! :-) And what if some anti-debian people get ahold of the logo and use it for evil purposes? What if someone gets hold of the Linux kernel and uses it to guide nuclear missiles? (Well, at least they have to share their changes with us :)) It will still be a piece of copyrighted material, regarless of whether Debian has the money to sue or not. That copyright is basicly that nobody can use or reproduce the logo w/o permission. Organizations and people (such as Debian) will regard that copyright and not use it or keep asking for permission. It's not much different than the issue of the software licenses. If the author didn't GRANT the permission to modify/distribute/etc, then that permission doesn't exist. A license that says this logo should only be used when referring specifically to Debian is plenty and probably still unenforceable. Maybe = * http://benham.net/index.html * * * -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- ---* *Darren Benham * Version: 3.1 * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++ P+++$ L++* * KC7YAQ * E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- * * Debian Developer * PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b DI+++ D++ * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * G++G+++ e h+ r* y+* * * --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- ---* = -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNqtfrrbps1lIfUYBAQH2MgP/YHbFyoNpW3zV0sBw+v5lZ3rSWafVHt2M nxEkQS7+aseHsvbpeMtm2rNoVxedimYrz78OhB8bergVXO9qnBly6qxNbeEnzHDC R5Ty3W8uea30VMIvYPnwLsKG02Gi2VaWl5Pmnd5nDxuTcDNfp6BJeuDjrAAtxbve lm0lSFtxBcM= =1Y++ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 11:44:06PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: Robert Woodcock wrote: You are licensed to use and distribute modified versions of this logo to refer to or advertise debian. Note that this fails DFSG point #6. I believe this was the original intent. We shouldn't license our logo by any license that does not comply with the DFSG. To do so would be hypocritical. Not true. It's the Debian Free SOFTWARE Guidelines. A logo is not software. It may well be that we want a logo whose use is restricted so that we can have some control over the quality of items that it is associated with. It appears that what we really need are two logos: one with a relatively open license and second with a more restricted one. The open one would be used on web pages, etc. An example where a more restricted license would be appropriate is letting it only be used on CDs that pass a test suite guaranteeing that the CD set is 'good enough'. Jay Treacy
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 10:35:50PM -0600, Andrew G . Feinberg wrote: Why in the world do we need to license something as trivial as a _logo_? Because if we don't, nobody has the right to make copies of it and display it publically. It's the same reason as with software. as a normal person that I dislike excessive legalese. If you really were a normal person, why are you a Debian developer? The proverbial normal people /hate/ (or at best tolerate) computers. (My point being that there is not one normal person on the face of Earth. Everyone have their quirks.) And a license by itself is not excessive legalese. Most free software licenses I've read are not legalese at all, and those that are (GNU (L)GPL and MPL come first to mind) are quite readable to a logically oriented mind with some patience. Larry Ewing and Tux. You don't see him writing a license, do you? The picture of Tux is licensed freely for any use as long as Larry Ewing is mentioned. Don't know about modification, though. Antti-Juhani -- %%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%% EMACS, n.: Emacs May Allow Customised Screwups (unknown origin)
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 11:44:06PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: We shouldn't license our logo by any license that does not comply with the DFSG. To do so would be hypocritical. James A. Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true. It's the Debian Free SOFTWARE Guidelines. You're trying to make a distinction between code and data, here? That doesn't work for the general case. A logo is not software. I'm not sure you're working with a viable definition of software. Here's the definition I get from www.m-w.com: Main Entry: soft·ware Pronunciation: 'soft-war, -wer Function: noun Date: 1960 : something used or associated with and usually contrasted with hardware: as a : the entire set of programs, procedures, and related documentation associated with a system and especially a computer system; specifically : computer programs b : materials for use with audiovisual equipment -- Raul
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 01:42:30PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 11:44:06PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: We shouldn't license our logo by any license that does not comply with the DFSG. To do so would be hypocritical. James A. Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true. It's the Debian Free SOFTWARE Guidelines. You're trying to make a distinction between code and data, here? That doesn't work for the general case. A logo is not software. I'm not sure you're working with a viable definition of software. I hope that you are not trying to argue that there is no difference between a program and a logo. This is clearly ridiculous. We seem to have a number of people talking past each other. One group want a logo with a relatively free license for uses such as web pages. This is perfectly reasonable. Another group of people are interested in a logo which is used for advertising products with the Debian name on it. Many people (me included), feel we need a more restrictive license on such a logo so that we may protect the name of Debian. We need to protect ourselves from abuse of such a logo as it may be used in ways that reflect badly on Debian. An example is some of the poor quality CDs that have been released with the name Debian on them. This is why I suggested that we have two logos. Just to make sure no one is advocating this, the GPL is not a particularly good license for licensing things such as logos and documentation. Read the archives for the many discussions about this. The existence of this discussion, which is at least the 10th time it has been discussed, clearly indicates that we need to vote on this issue. A clear vote with some archives to point people to in the future should keep us from rehashing this every few months. There are much more important things for us to be doing. Jay Treacy
Re: Debian logo its license
James A. Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hope that you are not trying to argue that there is no difference between a program and a logo. This is clearly ridiculous. That's not my point. However, the definition of software is broad enough to cover both, and the use of that particular word isn't going to resolve the issue. [Also, it's reasonable to talk about things which are both programs (or, perhaps, things which map from some argument domain to some range of results) and logos (or, perhaps, bitmapped images).] We seem to have a number of people talking past each other. One group want a logo with a relatively free license for uses such as web pages. This is perfectly reasonable. Agreed. Another group of people are interested in a logo which is used for advertising products with the Debian name on it. Many people (me included), feel we need a more restrictive license on such a logo so that we may protect the name of Debian. We need to protect ourselves from abuse of such a logo as it may be used in ways that reflect badly on Debian. An example is some of the poor quality CDs that have been released with the name Debian on them. I agree that this is an issue, but looking at our track record (especially the problems with the official hamm cds), I don't think an official logo is going to solve the problem. I think a better approach to the distributor quality problem is to provide distributor rating pages (basically just a concise list of significant issues for each distributor). RMS might not like it (then again, I've not asked him), but to me it seems like the right approach. The existence of this discussion, which is at least the 10th time it has been discussed, clearly indicates that we need to vote on this issue. A clear vote with some archives to point people to in the future should keep us from rehashing this every few months. There are much more important things for us to be doing. The existence of a recurring discussion usually indicates an unsolved problem. A vote might or might not resolve the underlying issue. In this case, the discussion seems to have been triggered by the expiration of the current logo license. -- Raul
Re: Debian logo its license
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- is the name debian a registered trademark? if it is, wouldn't it be sensible to do the same for the logo? - --p. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNqt2MUJhnFR90XSjAQHeFAf9EULUklt0QfjI2DAbrPK2A9ZmmmUvOhFY x0PpYHWvWoOF1nfiyuECerd1dLAaYsk748TWya+FuOMK8xl4aJYLE4CtcdYO3LPH FlUOPL0QgKj5sS9+a6xuSBnrnxvFAsvNBk5RYJamSZOIDaFTsAnBr5jseG+MjC+c 2Rt4IDYMBgAFoR/m8hs9MOFV9rln5oTZKGKjyzz0XeKsuf5jw8QKiIDQgGk9sLc/ 36n2/LPS/5K/lClz1B4uKqLZSSwSWmvcWSymubKeg7dZn9QL5thZYZLZpPs/65XV IbYDaIPPmwWh4NcWRPDocs+ymNdmgKpq5ftfq8DjhdZV50d2mps8sg== =IiPD -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 11:44:06PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: We shouldn't license our logo by any license that does not comply with the DFSG. To do so would be hypocritical. Not true. It's the Debian Free SOFTWARE Guidelines. A logo is not software. It may well be that we want a logo whose use is restricted so that we can have some control over the quality of items that it is associated with. More to the point, a logo is more like a name than software. Its purpose is to identify something, not make it work. We have DFSG software in Debian which has the license requirement that if a modified version fails to pass a particularly stringent, non-DFSG conformance test, it may not use a particular name to identify it. The ability to require renaming a program because the authors don't want a broken fork detracting from their reputations has been a part of the DFSG for a long time, and I didn't think that it was under dispute. Should not the author have the same control over other identifying marks (like logos) which are associated with the software? I don't think that that violates the spirit of the DFSG. If it violates the letter, then I think it should be looked into. It appears that what we really need are two logos: one with a relatively open license and second with a more restricted one. The open one would be used on web pages, etc. An example where a more restricted license would be appropriate is letting it only be used on CDs that pass a test suite guaranteeing that the CD set is 'good enough'. I agree. I would suggest that the two be closely linked in form... To use our current logo as an example, have the plain line-art penguin as the open logo, and the penguin in the center of a scalloped-edged annulus (as if it were in the center of a seal) as the restricted logo. Both scale well, both are distinctive, and both are similar enough to tell that they are both related. (I thought of suggesting the word certified, approved, or similar into the suggested logo, but words don't scale well, can be hard to read, imply things they probably shouldn't, and are language-specific.) Jay Treacy -- Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our liberty depends upon the chaos and cacaphony of the unfettered speech the First Amendment protects. -- A.L.A. v. U.S. Dept. of Justice
Re: Debian logo its license
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On 24-Jan-99 John Hasler wrote: Andrew G . Feinberg writes: Why in the world do we need to license something as trivial as a _logo_? We don't. Of course we do. Otherwise we'd have to grant permission to every tom-dick-harry that wanted to use it in any way-shape-form. = * http://benham.net/index.html * * * -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- ---* *Darren Benham * Version: 3.1 * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++ P+++$ L++* * KC7YAQ * E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- * * Debian Developer * PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b DI+++ D++ * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * G++G+++ e h+ r* y+* * * --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- ---* = -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNqu2J7bps1lIfUYBAQF1rwP/RA7BMTAge7XJJ7w924o9m+x4vow5m7RF oRtbW2tLKjn51v0D7foUEY0B5pNkwiq1N8yB6kgABM3Gx59E6sygnreCN3oiMmed M6Gfuc4mLghcaen0/cMLNPurpmQKdLPSNfGf/N334veReBC5m1WYr9bD28w4VJ4A KEhGsvzCMpY= =eelH -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Debian logo its license
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 02:32:27PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: The existence of a recurring discussion usually indicates an unsolved problem. A vote might or might not resolve the underlying issue. Let's hope that there is enough interest generated that we actually do solve the problem. In this case, the discussion seems to have been triggered by the expiration of the current logo license. True. I decided to leave it this way to force the issue - and it looks like it is working. If enough people complain loudly enough I or one of the other webmasters will extend it again. Jay Treacy
Re: Debian logo
Hello, On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 11:59:31PM -0700, Chris Waters wrote: Ideally, we need a version of the logo that can be reproduced in one or two colors. That way it can go directly on a CD or be printed inexpensively. Full-color printing can be rather expensive. And it should scale well, from fairly large to quite small. This means lines and *simple* curves, and probably solid shapes rather than outlines. Red Hat did it right, Debian didn't, quite. (A rare exception to the usual rule.:) Yes, this is important. But thjere also can be a flashy version and a simple version, for example, the Gnome feet is colorful but can easily be reduced to b/w. In any case, even if we do decide to make a better *logo*, we can keep ol' blue-eyes around as the official Debian mascot or something (in case people are worried that this is all some plot to get rid of him). Just a minor nit, I think we shouldn't make the logo at all, we should let professional artists do it. A gimp contest would be ideal. I was very impressed by the results of the Gnome logo gimp contest. Most of the entries were good logos to choose from. Marcus -- Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.Debian GNU/Linuxfinger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.orgmaster.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Debian logo
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 03:58:58PM -0500, Jeff Noxon wrote: I'd prefer a new logo as well (with no offense intended toward the kind person who created the current one!) But I can't draw, so I guess I should shut up. :-) I would prefer a new logo, too. We shouldn't draw it. We should run a gimp contest. They produced the Gnome logo, and there are artists as well as designer. They'll come up with a good, inspiring logo, I'm sure. We should vote the winner. Someone should write a proposal to be voted on when the constition is in place. Maybe I'll do it. Please contact me if you want to work with me on the exact wording. How did we arrive at the current logo? My memory stinks. Bruce made the decision after unfruitful efforts on the logo pages. Marcus -- Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.Debian GNU/Linuxfinger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.orgmaster.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Re: Debian logo
On Sat, 10 Oct 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 03:58:58PM -0500, Jeff Noxon wrote: I'd prefer a new logo as well (with no offense intended toward the kind person who created the current one!) I would prefer a new logo, too. We shouldn't draw it. We should run a gimp contest. They produced the Gnome logo, and there are artists as well as designer. They'll come up with a good, inspiring logo, I'm sure. We should vote the winner. good idea. i *really* like the GNU Penguin one. (see the default index.html on a new apache install if you don't know what i mean.) something based on that would be great. craig -- craig sanders
Re: Debian logo
On Sat, Oct 10, 1998 at 12:25:07PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: On Sat, 10 Oct 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: I would prefer a new logo, too. We shouldn't draw it. We should run a gimp contest. They produced the Gnome logo, and there are artists as well as designer. They'll come up with a good, inspiring logo, I'm sure. We should vote the winner. good idea. i *really* like the GNU Penguin one. (see the default index.html on a new apache install if you don't know what i mean.) something based on that would be great. Well, I do not like it, and because I think this is important, I want to give the most importnat reasons for me to dislike any GNU or penguin motive: * Debian should develop it's own identity. We are a strong enough entity to be considered a parallel, but seperate movement from GNU and Linux. We owe much to both, but still, we are not simply derivates, we are more, and we should reflect that in our logo. It is Debian GNU/Linux, not only GNU/Linux. The next point elaborates: * Debian does combine GNU and Linux sources, and embraces both. But this is not what defines us. The logo should reflect Debian, not two core software components we use for our purpose (to turn it into a joke, I want to make the GNU carry the X logo, and the penguin to carry the apache logo, and behind them Larry should raise his hands and praise them both ;) * Although the Hurd and Linux share some code, they are differently. As I'm working on the Debian GNU/Hurd port, I find the analogy of the picture you have in mind and Debian GNU/Linux at least a bit weak. Note: The picture was drawn before we started with Debian GNU/Hurd. * Furthermore, we must be able to trademark the logo. A reference to an existing logo would be more difficult to trademark. I consider the first point the most important one. If I would propose any theme for the gimp contest, I would make it a condition that no reference to the GNU logo or Linux logo must be made. This also increases creativity and inspiration, in my honest opinion. Thank you, Marcus -- Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.Debian GNU/Linuxfinger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.orgmaster.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Re: Debian logo
On Sat, Oct 10, 1998 at 02:43:05AM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: I would prefer a new logo, too. We shouldn't draw it. We should run a gimp contest. They produced the Gnome logo, and there are artists as well as designer. They'll come up with a good, inspiring logo, I'm sure. We should vote the winner. Ideally, we need a version of the logo that can be reproduced in one or two colors. That way it can go directly on a CD or be printed inexpensively. Full-color printing can be rather expensive. Someone should write a proposal to be voted on when the constition is in place. Maybe I'll do it. Please contact me if you want to work with me on the exact wording. How did we arrive at the current logo? My memory stinks. Bruce made the decision after unfruitful efforts on the logo pages. Ah. :-) Regards, Jeff -- It's time to close windows and open source. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds.
Re: Debian logo
Ideally, we need a version of the logo that can be reproduced in one or two colors. That way it can go directly on a CD or be printed inexpensively. Full-color printing can be rather expensive. And it should scale well, from fairly large to quite small. This means lines and *simple* curves, and probably solid shapes rather than outlines. Red Hat did it right, Debian didn't, quite. (A rare exception to the usual rule.:) In any case, even if we do decide to make a better *logo*, we can keep ol' blue-eyes around as the official Debian mascot or something (in case people are worried that this is all some plot to get rid of him). -- Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I have a truly elegant proof of the or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | above, but it is too long to fit into http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
Re: Debian logo
On Sat, 10 Oct 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: On Sat, Oct 10, 1998 at 12:25:07PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: On Sat, 10 Oct 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: I would prefer a new logo, too. We shouldn't draw it. We should run a gimp contest. They produced the Gnome logo, and there are artists as well as designer. They'll come up with a good, inspiring logo, I'm sure. We should vote the winner. good idea. i *really* like the GNU Penguin one. (see the default index.html on a new apache install if you don't know what i mean.) something based on that would be great. Well, I do not like it, and because I think this is important, I want to give the most importnat reasons for me to dislike any GNU or penguin motive: * Debian should develop it's own identity. We are a strong enough entity to be considered a parallel, but seperate movement from GNU and Linux. We owe much to both, but still, we are not simply derivates, we are more, and we should reflect that in our logo. It is Debian GNU/Linux, not only GNU/Linux. The next point elaborates: * Debian does combine GNU and Linux sources, and embraces both. But this is not what defines us. The logo should reflect Debian, not two core software components we use for our purpose (to turn it into a joke, I want to make the GNU carry the X logo, and the penguin to carry the apache logo, and behind them Larry should raise his hands and praise them both ;) * Although the Hurd and Linux share some code, they are differently. As I'm working on the Debian GNU/Hurd port, I find the analogy of the picture you have in mind and Debian GNU/Linux at least a bit weak. Note: The picture was drawn before we started with Debian GNU/Hurd. * Furthermore, we must be able to trademark the logo. A reference to an existing logo would be more difficult to trademark. I consider the first point the most important one. If I would propose any theme for the gimp contest, I would make it a condition that no reference to the GNU logo or Linux logo must be made. This also increases creativity and inspiration, in my honest opinion. A bit of an AOL, but I agree. It is interesting that /. doesn't use the red penguin when referring to us - it has anothere icon. I'm not convinced by that one either, but Given that the debian project embraces more than just GNU/Linux, our logo should as well. Matthew -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Steward of the Cambridge Tolkien Society Selwyn College Computer Support http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Chamber/8841/ http://www.cam.ac.uk/CambUniv/Societies/tolkien/ http://pick.sel.cam.ac.uk/
Re: Debian logo license still not resolved
Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: How about: * We require that people acknowledge the use of our trademark, quoting `Debian penguin logo automatic licence version 1' and the date. * The licence gives permission only for the year following the date quoted. Then if we want to change the licence we publish version 2 instead, leaving version 1 available but stating that it is no longer available. Users of the logo have to go and check each year that the licence hasn't changed, and update the date on their acknowledgement. As stated by Will Lowe, I think a registration process could handle this (i.e. re-register annually under the current license terms). Draft text below. There are a number of unresolved questions: * Do we want a separate logo and licence for `powered by Debian'? I think the licese should be the same in the least. * What about hardware manufacturers who preinstall Debian ? Do we just let them mail us ? Again, see Will's registration suggestion. Ian. Now I'll play lawyer, but we should really have a real one handle the language of this. DEBIAN PENGUIN LOGO AUTOMATIC LICENSE The Debian Penguin Logo is a Trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc (`SPI'). 1. Grant You are hereby granted a license to use the trademark on a software or informational product or a service, and in advertising and promotion of such products and services, provided that: This shouldn't be a numbered cluase since every other clause listed is soley relevant to Grant (at least as currently worded). The rest of the numbering should of course be adjusted to reflect this. 2. Term 2.1. You must acknowledge the trademark, stating that it is used under licence and giving today's date (the date of issue of the licence), alongside the trademark itself. 2.2. Your licence expires one year from the date of issue. 3. Composition of your product or service 3.1. In the case of a software product, at least half of the product must be derived from the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution (`the Distribution'). 3.2. In the case of an informational product, such as a book or a set of web pages, at least half of the content matter must be related to the Distribution. 3.3. In the case of a service, at least one half of the practice of the service must be related to the use of the Distribution. I think this is bogus. People can't put the Debian logo on a web page unless half of the page is dedicated to debian? How about changing this to the content must be substantially derived from, or directly referential to 'the Distribution', and in accordance with this license. 4. Defamation You must not intend to defame Software in the Public Interest or the Distribution. This should read must not instead of must not intend, and should be tied into the indemnity clause. There might also be a mention of remedies available in the event of breach, but a professional would know better. I think that there should also be a statement limiting this cluase to the use of the logo, since that's what we're licensing. Someone may defame SPI in an article in a pubication, and use the logo in an advertisement in the same publication. As long the defemation doesn't occur or isn't directly associated with the use of the logo. Its a bit too fascist as stated above. 5. Termination A general point here, as with cluase 4, it may be prudent to state some method of remedying a breach up front (to save SPI legal costs later). One such remedy could be described and referred to by both clauses that allowed a breach condition to be remedied within 30 days by some agreeable means lest other remedies apply. The friendlier we are here, the better in my view. We are talking about freedom after all. There might also be a default dispute resolution procedure that makes it easy for offendors to state there case and clear the breach. 5.1. This automatic licence must not have been withdrawn (on or before the day of issue) for new licencing by a notice published alongside it by SPI. I'm not sure what this means, and that probably means some other people won't know either. This should be restated so its more clear. 5.2. Your licence may be terminated by SPI at any time, for any reason, by giving you notice via email or other convenient means. In this case, you will immediately cease to use the trademark, except that you may continue until no longer than one year from the date of issue to distribute any pre-existing inventory of a physical medium (such as a book or CD, or advertising that has already been printed) containing the logo. This sounds a bit harsh. How about a longer lead time than immeadiately and changing the notification to include or as announced on our public mailing list, or publish on our web site and getting rid of convenient since that has
Debian logo license still not resolved
Another person has requested use of the Debian logo. As most people are pretty happy with the license I added a clause saying the logo is usable under the current license (http://www.debian.org/logos/logo.html. Update should reach there soon) until 31 January 1998 and told him he could use it under that license. Hopefully we'll have this finalized by the end of the month. Ian, can you help this come to completion soon? - Jay -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Debian logo license still not resolved
James A.Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Another person has requested use of the Debian logo. As most people are pretty happy with the license I added a clause saying the logo is usable under the current license (http://www.debian.org/logos/logo.html. Update should reach there soon) until 31 January 1998 and told him he could use it under that license. Hopefully we'll have this finalized by the end of the month. Thanks. Ian, can you help this come to completion soon? I don't have a problem with the licence. However, I think we should build into it some mechanism where we can change the licence. At the moment the licence appears to be perpetual, which isn't quite what we want. How about: * We require that people acknowledge the use of our trademark, quoting `Debian penguin logo automatic licence version 1' and the date. * The licence gives permission only for the year following the date quoted. Then if we want to change the licence we publish version 2 instead, leaving version 1 available but stating that it is no longer available. Users of the logo have to go and check each year that the licence hasn't changed, and update the date on their acknowledgement. Draft text below. There are a number of unresolved questions: * Do we want a separate logo and licence for `powered by Debian' ? * What about hardware manufacturers who preinstall Debian ? Do we just let them mail us ? Ian. DEBIAN PENGUIN LOGO AUTOMATIC LICENSE The Debian Penguin Logo is a Trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc (`SPI'). 1. Grant You are hereby granted a license to use the trademark on a software or informational product or a service, and in advertising and promotion of such products and services, provided that: 2. Term 2.1. You must acknowledge the trademark, stating that it is used under licence and giving today's date (the date of issue of the licence), alongside the trademark itself. 2.2. Your licence expires one year from the date of issue. 3. Composition of your product or service 3.1. In the case of a software product, at least half of the product must be derived from the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution (`the Distribution'). 3.2. In the case of an informational product, such as a book or a set of web pages, at least half of the content matter must be related to the Distribution. 3.3. In the case of a service, at least one half of the practice of the service must be related to the use of the Distribution. 4. Defamation You must not intend to defame Software in the Public Interest or the Distribution. 5. Termination 5.1. This automatic licence must not have been withdrawn (on or before the day of issue) for new licencing by a notice published alongside it by SPI. 5.2. Your licence may be terminated by SPI at any time, for any reason, by giving you notice via email or other convenient means. In this case, you will immediately cease to use the trademark, except that you may continue until no longer than one year from the date of issue to distribute any pre-existing inventory of a physical medium (such as a book or CD, or advertising that has already been printed) containing the logo. 5.3. You must not have been given notice (on or before the date of issue) by SPI that this automatic licence is not available to you. 6. Indemnity In the event of a legal dispute between you and SPI, you agree to indemnify SPI against any legal fees and penalties. If the rights granted by this license are not appropriate for your product, you are encouraged to contact SPI to negotiate an individual license. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Debian logo license still not resolved
On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Ian Jackson wrote: Then if we want to change the licence we publish version 2 instead, leaving version 1 available but stating that it is no longer available. Users of the logo have to go and check each year that the These last two sentences are a little wacky. You mean, leaving version one someplace people can still read it, but with a notice that it doesn't apply to new licensees after a certain date? * Do we want a separate logo and licence for `powered by Debian' ? Well, it doesn't really make sense for a book to be powered by Debian, does it? Maybe this should be available only for software/hardware systems. I suggest the following addition: 7. Registration You are required to notify SPI (via email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) _before_ initiating use of the logo (before pressing the CD or printing the book) of your intent to use the logo on your product. This communication must include legal contact information for your business and a simple description of the product (e.g. Debian 2.0 Official CD set). That way we can keep track of who's using it, in case we need to retract the licence at a later date. Will -- | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | http://www.cis.udel.edu/~lowe/ | -- |If at first you don't succeed, redefine success. | | -- Taken from Hennesey and Patterson,| | _Computer_Organization_And_Design_:_The_Hardware_/_Software_Interface_ | -- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Debian logo license still not resolved
On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Ian Jackson wrote: There are a number of unresolved questions: * Do we want a separate logo and licence for `powered by Debian' ? Considering the time it has taken to come to closure on the first one, I would not recommend it. 'Powered by Debian' or any other marketing slogan containing the name Debian, when approved should *require* The Debian Logo appear on all product materials that meet the criterion contains Debian. * What about hardware manufacturers who preinstall Debian ? Do we just let them mail us ? If they supply an Official CD set with the machine they should be able to use both the Official title and the Debian name as long as they are associated with The Debian Logo. I guess, over all, this means I favor a single logo. Ian. DEBIAN PENGUIN LOGO AUTOMATIC LICENSE The Debian Penguin Logo is a Trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc (`SPI'). 1. Grant You are hereby granted a license to use the trademark on a software or informational product or a service, and in advertising and promotion of such products and services, provided that: 2. Term 2.1. You must acknowledge the trademark, stating that it is used under licence and giving today's date (the date of issue of the licence), alongside the trademark itself. 2.2. Your licence expires one year from the date of issue. 3. Composition of your product or service 3.1. In the case of a software product, at least half of the product must be derived from the Debian GNU/Linux Distribution (`the Distribution'). Measured by weight? Several reasonable measures present themselves...total bytes, number of packages...but it seems to me that the critical issue is whether or not the Debian components, together, make a reasonable OS base for the product. A standard system is easy to define (all packages with priority standard or higher are installed) and should probably be the minimum system we should allow to be associated with the Debian name. After that point, what concern is it of ours how large the chunk of value added software is? Even a Debian archive, trimmed down to standard and above will take most of a CD to provide both the binaries and the source. Why should we restrict the number of other, full, CDs that the reseller wants to add to the product? What is wrong with having Powered by Debian at the top of a long list of Product Names? 3.2. In the case of an informational product, such as a book or a set of web pages, at least half of the content matter must be related to the Distribution. While the question of a suitable measure isn't at issue here (pages seems the obvious one) the question of half should be reduced to equal share. For instance consider a book on Debian, Red Hat, and Slackware. It would seem quite fair to me for the Debian section to only contain 33 1/3% of the total volume of the book. Minor question here. Does a bad review in such a book constitute intent to defame SPI? 3.3. In the case of a service, at least one half of the practice of the service must be related to the use of the Distribution. Same problem as the book, with an additional issue: Consider a service that does tech support for both Debian and Red Hat (I will not make the math worse by adding Slackware. It is unnecessary for this example). Must they agree to provide equal service in these two areas? That is, if the Red Hat calls exceed the Debian ones, will the service provider be able to both answer those questions and keep his Debian certification as well? That isn't apparent from this wording. 4. Defamation You must not intend to defame Software in the Public Interest or the Distribution. Seems pretty obvious to me, but I guess spelling it out makes the legal issues easier. 5. Termination I have no problems with the rest of this, asside from the fact that it appears both aggressive and abrupt in its treatment of the entity using the license. (BTW, my dictionary declares the spelling to be license. Is this just a British/American difference in spelling?) 5.1. This automatic licence must not have been withdrawn (on or before the day of issue) for new licencing by a notice published alongside it by SPI. 5.2. Your licence may be terminated by SPI at any time, for any reason, by giving you notice via email or other convenient means. In this case, you will immediately cease to use the trademark, except that you may continue until no longer than one year from the date of issue to distribute any pre-existing inventory of a physical medium (such as a book or CD, or advertising that has already been printed) containing the logo. 5.3. You must not have been given notice (on or before the date of issue) by SPI that this automatic licence is not available to you. 6. Indemnity In the event of a legal dispute between you and SPI, you
Debian Logo - Transparent Version
I have converted our new logo into a transparent GIF, if anyone is interested. It looks pretty decent and is nice for light colored backgrounds. It can be found at the bottom of my web page: http://thomppj.student.okstate.edu/~thomppj/ - Paul J Thompson --- A squirrel tangled with a 23,000 volt line in Stillwater, Oklahoma on Saturday, Nov. 22, 1997. The results blacked out the entire campus of Oklahoma State University, and, of course, one squirrel. pgpZf47xOluNc.pgp Description: PGP signature
