Re: [License-discuss] Logo for an (O)pen (S)ource (Li)cense (C)ompendium
Dear Nigel, we discussed your detailed answer during the last days. Many thanks. We already implemented what we had had to conclude: > It might be even more useful for developers* to discuss a > wider range of licenses than falls under OSI approved > licenses much like CC covers licenses ranging from CC0 to > CC-NC-ND. [...] That would, of course, require > your own new logo as it would be out of scope for the OSI. A valid view, particularly because we ourselves are licensing the OSLiC under [the non OSI-license] CC BY-SA 3.0 (because it's a document, not a piece of software). Your argument might by read as first reason not to limit our future by a logo - although we for the first time stick to focus on the OSI licenses. We do not want to lose ourselves in the jungle of details ;-) > Large IT companies have legal departments that should > understand IP issues and will have to know the requirements > for all the jurisdictions where they have presence. Yeep, but's simply too expensive to involve one lawyer into each of the many company projects using OS software. It's better to write a compendium together with developers AND lawyers. > What jurisdictions were you thinking of covering in your compendium? This is one of the most "dangerous" questions: No question there are different legal systems. For example: In USA the No-Warranty-Clauses seem to be necessary and valid. In Germany they are simply invalid and are automatically be replaced by the rules of making a present. But trying to explain / to treat all country specific aspects will blow up the work and will probably prevent us from finishing it. We want to solve this issue by using a simple and (perhaps) naive strategy: Our goal is, to find one way (for each use-case for each license) to use Open Source Software in a regular manner. We want to take the licenses as they are (and as they are meant / have to be interpreted from the viewpoint of an honest and reasonable reader / user). We want to show one way on which followers can trust that the OS community / the OS developer will effectly say: yes, indeed, by going this way they fulfilled our conditions (they "payed" the price for using our software). There may by other ways. Probably there will be many other ways - especially with respect to the legal systems of specific countries. But if we take the license text seriously we should find one way being valid for all (many?) cases. Hence we do not wan't to do the job of a lawyer. We do not want to "judge" / consult companies, wether the specific way they used is correct or not or what they could do to fulfill the license in the weakest way. We want to formulate one concrete, valid reliable way, even if the companies (etc.), who follow this way, then do more than they must do according to their legal system. > Will DTAG give OSI oversight and edit powers on the > compendium? [...] What does "develop this compendium > together with the community" really mean in this context? Yes, like everyone who wants to collaborate. This participation is organized by the methods of GitHub. For details you now may already have a look at http://dtag-dbu.github.com/oslic/en/collaboration/community.html and https://github.com/dtag-dbu/oslic. At least by using the GitHub method 'fork' you and the OSI already have an access to all sources. But we strongly invite you and the OSI to become a real collaborator in the sense of GitHub. (Although for the moment we expect that you will probably wait until more concrete content will be filled into the OSLiC: it's still a little bit empty. That's the flipside of 'publishing early, publishing often ;-) ) > A logo that looks like the OSI logo implies that > OSI approves of your interpretations. Especially if the OSI > explicitly grants you permission to use a similar logo. [...] > A product carrying a logo similar looking to the OSI logo but > isn't actually from the OSI strikes me as sketchy. This is a second very important reason, not to use the logo we proposed. We ourselves (from an internal view into the world) wanted to express with the logo that we want to respect the OSI, the OSD, and their background informations as a leading source and as a directive instance. You (from the external view into the OSLiC world) got the impression the we would try to obtain an approval surreptitiously. This misleading must not happen again (and probably would happen even to other if we stick on the logo). Therefore we changed the logo during this weekend. > Why not first attempt do it under the auspices of the OSI > itself? I would > imagine the OSI would welcome this kind of help and you might > get more contributors. This is that what we prefer. natrually we are starting to write the OSLiC as we planned to do. But each comment /advice is welcome, espcially by the OSI! And when/if the OSI finally will say [again: for the moment that seems to be a little to early] 'Let
Re: [License-discuss] Logo for an (O)pen (S)ource (Li)cense (C)ompendium
Karsten, It might be even more useful for developers* to discuss a wider range of licenses than falls under OSI approved licenses much like CC covers licenses ranging from CC0 to CC-NC-ND. Reference licenses, Academic (non-commerical) licenses, etc all have business uses if your target is large IT companies. That would, of course, require your own new logo as it would be out of scope for the OSI. Really, what you are suggesting is what OSI should be doing. Perhaps you can provide the resources required to generate a CC like plain English and/or German explanation of the legal requirements (aka your todo list) for the various OSI licenses under the OSI banner itself. There no new logo is required. Large IT companies have legal departments that should understand IP issues and will have to know the requirements for all the jurisdictions where they have presence. As much as possible anyway. What jurisdictions were you thinking of covering in your compendium? Will DTAG give OSI oversight and edit powers on the compendium? A logo that looks like the OSI logo implies that OSI approves of your interpretations. Especially if the OSI explicitly grants you permission to use a similar logo. What does "develop this compendium together with the community" really mean in this context? Why not first attempt do it under the auspices of the OSI itself? I would imagine the OSI would welcome this kind of help and you might get more contributors. A product carrying a logo similar looking to the OSI logo but isn't actually from the OSI strikes me as sketchy. I note that you are already using that logo on your oslic.org domain. I assume for testing but...why the little TM symbol already on your logo? Your domain is also blocked by our websense filters as a potentially damaging site. You should have your webadmin look into that. Regards, Nigel * Frankly, what is needed are CC licenses safe for software use. Every so often I bump into software licensed under CC anyway. On 2/22/12 2:04 PM, "Reincke, Karsten" wrote: >Dear Karl; > >Sorry for posting 'twice'; your first answer didn't arrive me. You asked: > >> I'm not sure what the answer is yet; we'll have to discuss it with the >> Board. But first, can you tell us whether it is the case that every >> license discussed in the compendium is OSI-approved? One thing's for >> sure: we can't have our logo used to refer to non-OSI-approved licenses, >> so that question is fundamental I think. > >Topic of the compendium 'OSLiC' are solely the OSI approved licenses. We >don't want to cover / to discuss other licenses, neither proprietary >licenses nor public domain licenses. The title is meant strictly: Open >Source License Compendium, nothing else. > >in the hope to support a positive decision >Karsten >--- >Deutsche Telekom AG >Products & Innovation >Karsten Reincke, PMP® >Fach-Senior Manager PC&S >Software Engineering >T-Online-Allee 1 >64295 Darmstadt >Tel.: +49 6151 680 - 8941 >Fax.: +49 6151 680 - 2529 >E-Mail k.rein...@telekom.de >http://www.telekom.de/ >____________________________ >Von: Karl Fogel [kfo...@red-bean.com] >Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. Februar 2012 18:18 >An: license-discuss@opensource.org >Betreff: Re: [License-discuss] Logo for an (O)pen (S)ource (Li)cense >(C)ompendium > >[I think Karsten reposted this because there was a moderation delay on >the original message, to which I have already responded on-list. Please >use that original thread if possible.] > >-K > >"Reincke, Karsten" writes: >>Deutsche Telekom AG (DTAG) is writing an Open Source License >>Compendium, which we intend to be made available to the whole Open >>Source community. >> >>Large (IT) companies are particularily challenged by the quantity of >>licenses and their various versions. It is becoming quite expensive >>for each company to allocate and train employees as "Open Source >>License Experts" in order to ensure that the company acts according to >>those Open Source licenses touched by their projects. A better >>solution would be to have something like a "compendium" which lists >>all relevant usage scenarios, and offers for the major Open Source >>licenses something like a to-do list that describes what one has to do >>in order to fulfill the license conditions applicable to these usage >>scenarios. As far as we know such a reliable compendium doesn't exist >>at the moment. >> >>Following the spirit of Open Source Software, DTAG wants to publish >>this compendium under the license 'Creative Commons >>Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Germany'. Moreover, DTAG intends to host >>
Re: [License-discuss] Logo for an (O)pen (S)ource (Li)cense (C)ompendium
Dear Karl; Sorry for posting 'twice'; your first answer didn't arrive me. You asked: > I'm not sure what the answer is yet; we'll have to discuss it with the > Board. But first, can you tell us whether it is the case that every > license discussed in the compendium is OSI-approved? One thing's for > sure: we can't have our logo used to refer to non-OSI-approved licenses, > so that question is fundamental I think. Topic of the compendium 'OSLiC' are solely the OSI approved licenses. We don't want to cover / to discuss other licenses, neither proprietary licenses nor public domain licenses. The title is meant strictly: Open Source License Compendium, nothing else. in the hope to support a positive decision Karsten --- Deutsche Telekom AG Products & Innovation Karsten Reincke, PMP® Fach-Senior Manager PC&S Software Engineering T-Online-Allee 1 64295 Darmstadt Tel.: +49 6151 680 - 8941 Fax.: +49 6151 680 - 2529 E-Mail k.rein...@telekom.de http://www.telekom.de/ Von: Karl Fogel [kfo...@red-bean.com] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. Februar 2012 18:18 An: license-discuss@opensource.org Betreff: Re: [License-discuss] Logo for an (O)pen (S)ource (Li)cense (C)ompendium [I think Karsten reposted this because there was a moderation delay on the original message, to which I have already responded on-list. Please use that original thread if possible.] -K "Reincke, Karsten" writes: >Deutsche Telekom AG (DTAG) is writing an Open Source License >Compendium, which we intend to be made available to the whole Open >Source community. > >Large (IT) companies are particularily challenged by the quantity of >licenses and their various versions. It is becoming quite expensive >for each company to allocate and train employees as "Open Source >License Experts" in order to ensure that the company acts according to >those Open Source licenses touched by their projects. A better >solution would be to have something like a "compendium" which lists >all relevant usage scenarios, and offers for the major Open Source >licenses something like a to-do list that describes what one has to do >in order to fulfill the license conditions applicable to these usage >scenarios. As far as we know such a reliable compendium doesn't exist >at the moment. > >Following the spirit of Open Source Software, DTAG wants to publish >this compendium under the license 'Creative Commons >Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Germany'. Moreover, DTAG intends to host >the sources of this compendium on github: we want to follow the rule >publish early, publish often', and to develop this compendium together >with the community. > >As this compendium will serve the Open Source community, and also >perhaps help the Open Source Initiative achieve its goals of promoting >open source usage and bridging the gaps between producers and >consumers of open source software, we would like adopt a logo that >reflects this. As such, we are considering this image: >http://www.oslic.org/fileadmin/images/oslic-logo-315x252.png. We would >like to ask the Open Source Initiative if this would be acceptable to >the organisation. > >We understand that 'Opensource.org site content is licensed under a >Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License'. Hence, deriving something >from the OSI logo can be achieved, and we naturally also want to >respect the OSI Logo Usage Guidelines ( >http://www.opensource.org/logo-usage-guidelines). Our proposed logo >shall express that the OSLiC (Open Source License Compendium) shall >act according to the spirit and intentions of the 'umbrella' Open >Source Initiative > >We look forward to your feedback, and sincerely hope that the proposed >logo is acceptable. Please let us know if this is the case. > >Best Regards >K. Reincke, G. Sharpe, J. Dobson >--- >Deutsche Telekom AG >Products & Innovation >Karsten Reincke, PMP® >Fach-Senior Manager T&P/A&S/TM >T-Online-Allee 1 >64295 Darmstadt >Tel.: +49 6151 680 - 8941 >Fax.: +49 6151 680 - 2529 >E-Mail k.rein...@telekom.de >http://www.telekom.de/ > >Erleben, was verbindet. > >Deutsche Telekom AG >Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender) >Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender), >Dr. Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Timotheus >Höttges, Claudia Nemat, Thomas Sattelberger >Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn >WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE50478376 > >Große Veränderungen fangen klein an - Ressourcen schonen und nicht >jede E-Mail drucken. > >Hinweis: Diese E-Mail und / oder die Anhänge ist / sind vertraulich >und ausschließlich für den bezeichneten Adressaten bes
Re: [License-discuss] Logo for an (O)pen (S)ource (Li)cense (C)ompendium
[I think Karsten reposted this because there was a moderation delay on the original message, to which I have already responded on-list. Please use that original thread if possible.] -K "Reincke, Karsten" writes: >Deutsche Telekom AG (DTAG) is writing an Open Source License >Compendium, which we intend to be made available to the whole Open >Source community. > >Large (IT) companies are particularily challenged by the quantity of >licenses and their various versions. It is becoming quite expensive >for each company to allocate and train employees as "Open Source >License Experts" in order to ensure that the company acts according to >those Open Source licenses touched by their projects. A better >solution would be to have something like a "compendium" which lists >all relevant usage scenarios, and offers for the major Open Source >licenses something like a to-do list that describes what one has to do >in order to fulfill the license conditions applicable to these usage >scenarios. As far as we know such a reliable compendium doesn't exist >at the moment. > >Following the spirit of Open Source Software, DTAG wants to publish >this compendium under the license 'Creative Commons >Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Germany'. Moreover, DTAG intends to host >the sources of this compendium on github: we want to follow the rule >publish early, publish often', and to develop this compendium together >with the community. > >As this compendium will serve the Open Source community, and also >perhaps help the Open Source Initiative achieve its goals of promoting >open source usage and bridging the gaps between producers and >consumers of open source software, we would like adopt a logo that >reflects this. As such, we are considering this image: >http://www.oslic.org/fileadmin/images/oslic-logo-315x252.png. We would >like to ask the Open Source Initiative if this would be acceptable to >the organisation. > >We understand that 'Opensource.org site content is licensed under a >Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License'. Hence, deriving something >from the OSI logo can be achieved, and we naturally also want to >respect the OSI Logo Usage Guidelines ( >http://www.opensource.org/logo-usage-guidelines). Our proposed logo >shall express that the OSLiC (Open Source License Compendium) shall >act according to the spirit and intentions of the 'umbrella' Open >Source Initiative > >We look forward to your feedback, and sincerely hope that the proposed >logo is acceptable. Please let us know if this is the case. > >Best Regards >K. Reincke, G. Sharpe, J. Dobson >--- >Deutsche Telekom AG >Products & Innovation >Karsten Reincke, PMP® >Fach-Senior Manager T&P/A&S/TM >T-Online-Allee 1 >64295 Darmstadt >Tel.: +49 6151 680 - 8941 >Fax.: +49 6151 680 - 2529 >E-Mail k.rein...@telekom.de >http://www.telekom.de/ > >Erleben, was verbindet. > >Deutsche Telekom AG >Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender) >Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender), >Dr. Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Timotheus >Höttges, Claudia Nemat, Thomas Sattelberger >Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn >WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE50478376 > >Große Veränderungen fangen klein an - Ressourcen schonen und nicht >jede E-Mail drucken. > >Hinweis: Diese E-Mail und / oder die Anhänge ist / sind vertraulich >und ausschließlich für den bezeichneten Adressaten bestimmt. Jegliche >Durchsicht, Weitergabe oder Kopieren dieser E-Mail ist strengstens >verboten. Wenn Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren >Sie bitte unverzüglich den Absender und vernichten Sie die Nachricht >und alle Anhänge. Vielen Dank. >___ >License-discuss mailing list >License-discuss@opensource.org >http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
[License-discuss] Logo for an (O)pen (S)ource (Li)cense (C)ompendium
Dear OSI Experts, Deutsche Telekom AG (DTAG) is writing an Open Source License Compendium, which we intend to be made available to the whole Open Source community. Large (IT) companies are particularily challenged by the quantity of licenses and their various versions. It is becoming quite expensive for each company to allocate and train employees as "Open Source License Experts" in order to ensure that the company acts according to those Open Source licenses touched by their projects. A better solution would be to have something like a "compendium" which lists all relevant usage scenarios, and offers for the major Open Source licenses something like a to-do list that describes what one has to do in order to fulfill the license conditions applicable to these usage scenarios. As far as we know such a reliable compendium doesn't exist at the moment. Following the spirit of Open Source Software, DTAG wants to publish this compendium under the license 'Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Germany'. Moreover, DTAG intends to host the sources of this compendium on github: we want to follow the rule 'publish early, publish often', and to develop this compendium together with the community. As this compendium will serve the Open Source community, and also perhaps help the Open Source Initiative achieve its goals of promoting open source usage and bridging the gaps between producers and consumers of open source software, we would like adopt a logo that reflects this. As such, we are considering this image: http://www.oslic.org/fileadmin/images/oslic-logo-315x252.png. We would like to ask the Open Source Initiative if this would be acceptable to the organisation. We understand that 'Opensource.org site content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License'. Hence, deriving something from the OSI logo can be achieved, and we naturally also want to respect the OSI Logo Usage Guidelines ( http://www.opensource.org/logo-usage-guidelines). Our proposed logo shall express that the OSLiC (Open Source License Compendium) shall act according to the spirit and intentions of the 'umbrella' Open Source Initiative We look forward to your feedback, and sincerely hope that the proposed logo is acceptable. Please let us know if this is the case. Best Regards K. Reincke, G. Sharpe, J. Dobson --- Deutsche Telekom AG Products & Innovation Karsten Reincke, PMP® Fach-Senior Manager T&P/A&S/TM T-Online-Allee 1 64295 Darmstadt Tel.: +49 6151 680 - 8941 Fax.: +49 6151 680 - 2529 E-Mail k.rein...@telekom.de http://www.telekom.de/ Erleben, was verbindet. Deutsche Telekom AG Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender) Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender), Dr. Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Timotheus Höttges, Claudia Nemat, Thomas Sattelberger Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE50478376 Große Veränderungen fangen klein an - Ressourcen schonen und nicht jede E-Mail drucken. Hinweis: Diese E-Mail und / oder die Anhänge ist / sind vertraulich und ausschließlich für den bezeichneten Adressaten bestimmt. Jegliche Durchsicht, Weitergabe oder Kopieren dieser E-Mail ist strengstens verboten. Wenn Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte unverzüglich den Absender und vernichten Sie die Nachricht und alle Anhänge. Vielen Dank. ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
Re: [License-discuss] Logo for an (O)pen (S)ource (Li)cense (C)ompendium
"Reincke, Karsten" writes: >Deutsche Telekom AG (DTAG) is writing an Open Source License >Compendium, which we intend to be made available to the whole Open >Source community. > >Large (IT) companies are particularily challenged by the quantity of >licenses and their various versions. It is becoming quite expensive >for each company to allocate and train employees as "Open Source >License Experts" in order to ensure that the company acts according to >those Open Source licenses touched by their projects. A better >solution would be to have something like a "compendium" which lists >all relevant usage scenarios, and offers for the major Open Source >licenses something like a to-do list that describes what one has to do >in order to fulfill the license conditions applicable to these usage >scenarios. As far as we know such a reliable compendium doesn't exist >at the moment. > >Following the spirit of Open Source Software, DTAG wants to publish >this compendium under the license 'Creative Commons >Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Germany'. Moreover, DTAG intends to host >the sources of this compendium on github: we want to follow the rule >publish early, publish often', and to develop this compendium together >with the community. > >As this compendium will serve the Open Source community, and also >perhaps help the Open Source Initiative achieve its goals of promoting >open source usage and bridging the gaps between producers and >consumers of open source software, we would like adopt a logo that >reflects this. As such, we are considering the attached logo, and >would like to ask the Open Source Initiative if this would be >acceptable to the organisation. > >We understand that 'Opensource.org site content is licensed under a >Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License'. Hence, deriving something >from the OSI logo can be achieved, and we naturally also want to >respect the OSI Logo Usage Guidelines ( >http://www.opensource.org/logo-usage-guidelines). Our proposed logo >shall express that the OSLiC (Open Source License Compendium) shall >act according to the spirit and intentions of the 'umbrella' Open >Source Initiative > >We look forward to your feedback, and sincerely hope that the proposed >logo is acceptable. Please let us know if this is the case. Thanks for your mail, Karsten. This sounds like a great project, and it's very nice to hear you're releasing the compendium under a free license! The relevant set of practices for the OSI logo is trademark law, rather than copyright law -- the issue is potential dilution of the mark. I'm not sure what the answer is yet; we'll have to discuss it with the Board. But first, can you tell us whether it is the case that every license discussed in the compendium is OSI-approved? One thing's for sure: we can't have our logo used to refer to non-OSI-approved licenses, so that question is fundamental I think. (One outcome of this discussion might be that we update http://www.opensource.org/logo-usage-guidelines to discuss whether or when it is permissible to add new elements to the logo.) I suspect approving a derivative logo will be difficult, because of the potential for confusion about the meaning of our original logo and about OSI involvement in the project. If so, one solution would be to use the original OSI logo in the compendium in its normal sense -- to refer to OSI-approved licenses -- and separately apply a new logo to refer to the compendium as a whole. Thoughts? Best, -Karl >Best Regards >K. Reincke, G. Sharpe, J. Dobson >--- >Deutsche Telekom AG >Products & Innovation >Karsten Reincke, PMP® >Fach-Senior Manager T&P/A&S/TM >T-Online-Allee 1 >64295 Darmstadt >Tel.: +49 6151 680 - 8941 >Fax.: +49 6151 680 - 2529 >E-Mail k.rein...@telekom.de >http://www.telekom.de/ > >Erleben, was verbindet. > >Deutsche Telekom AG >Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender) >Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender), >Dr. Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Timotheus >Höttges, Claudia Nemat, Thomas Sattelberger >Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 >Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn >WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE50478376 > >Große Veränderungen fangen klein an - Ressourcen schonen und nicht >jede E-Mail drucken. > >Hinweis: Diese E-Mail und / oder die Anhänge ist / sind vertraulich >und ausschließlich für den bezeichneten Adressaten bestimmt. Jegliche >Durchsicht, Weitergabe oder Kopieren dieser E-Mail ist strengstens >verboten. Wenn Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren >Sie bitte unverzüglich den Absender und vernichten Sie die Nachricht >und alle Anhänge. Vielen Dank. > >___ >License-discuss mailing list >License-discuss@opensource.org >http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
[License-discuss] Logo for an (O)pen (S)ource (Li)cense (C)ompendium
Dear OSI Experts, Deutsche Telekom AG (DTAG) is writing an Open Source License Compendium, which we intend to be made available to the whole Open Source community. Large (IT) companies are particularily challenged by the quantity of licenses and their various versions. It is becoming quite expensive for each company to allocate and train employees as "Open Source License Experts" in order to ensure that the company acts according to those Open Source licenses touched by their projects. A better solution would be to have something like a "compendium" which lists all relevant usage scenarios, and offers for the major Open Source licenses something like a to-do list that describes what one has to do in order to fulfill the license conditions applicable to these usage scenarios. As far as we know such a reliable compendium doesn't exist at the moment. Following the spirit of Open Source Software, DTAG wants to publish this compendium under the license 'Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Germany'. Moreover, DTAG intends to host the sources of this compendium on github: we want to follow the rule 'publish early, publish often', and to develop this compendium together with the community. As this compendium will serve the Open Source community, and also perhaps help the Open Source Initiative achieve its goals of promoting open source usage and bridging the gaps between producers and consumers of open source software, we would like adopt a logo that reflects this. As such, we are considering the attached logo, and would like to ask the Open Source Initiative if this would be acceptable to the organisation. We understand that 'Opensource.org site content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License'. Hence, deriving something from the OSI logo can be achieved, and we naturally also want to respect the OSI Logo Usage Guidelines ( http://www.opensource.org/logo-usage-guidelines). Our proposed logo shall express that the OSLiC (Open Source License Compendium) shall act according to the spirit and intentions of the 'umbrella' Open Source Initiative We look forward to your feedback, and sincerely hope that the proposed logo is acceptable. Please let us know if this is the case. Best Regards K. Reincke, G. Sharpe, J. Dobson --- Deutsche Telekom AG Products & Innovation Karsten Reincke, PMP® Fach-Senior Manager T&P/A&S/TM T-Online-Allee 1 64295 Darmstadt Tel.: +49 6151 680 - 8941 Fax.: +49 6151 680 - 2529 E-Mail k.rein...@telekom.de http://www.telekom.de/ Erleben, was verbindet. Deutsche Telekom AG Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender) Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender), Dr. Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Timotheus Höttges, Claudia Nemat, Thomas Sattelberger Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE50478376 Große Veränderungen fangen klein an - Ressourcen schonen und nicht jede E-Mail drucken. Hinweis: Diese E-Mail und / oder die Anhänge ist / sind vertraulich und ausschließlich für den bezeichneten Adressaten bestimmt. Jegliche Durchsicht, Weitergabe oder Kopieren dieser E-Mail ist strengstens verboten. Wenn Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte unverzüglich den Absender und vernichten Sie die Nachricht und alle Anhänge. Vielen Dank.<>___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
