also sprach Milan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.07.26.2132 +0200]:
> If it is, I would kindly ask you to direct me to the URL containg
> it or to send it to me on this email address.
http://www.debian.org/logos/
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f.
On 26.07.05, Milan wrote:
Hi Milan,
> I wanted to ask you if the debian logo is avaible in some of the
> vector formats?
You can download the logos in encapsulated postscript from
http://www.debian.org/logos
René van Bevern,
http://progn.org
pgpn0u69zOvfp.pgp
Description: PGP signa
Hello!
First of all, I apologize if I directed this message to the wrong address.
I wan to make some Debian related graphics like wallpapers, 3D art,
icons or similar, and I wanted to ask you if the debian logo is avaible
in some of the vector formats?
If it is, I would kindly ask you to dir
I ordered one of you cable filters and received an empty envelope. Now I
can't in touch with the company or you. I want my filter.
Mark
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 14:06 +0200, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
> and probably
>* If they can be subject to General Resolutions or if they are subject
> to the Debian Constitution
It seems to me that "subject to the Debian Constitution" covers the
other tests, doesn't it? While there may be
Ian writes:
> Re Debian having a more restrictive trademark policy than Linux: Let's
> definitely talk about that.
If we are going to enforce and defend our mark (whether or not we should is
a seperate issue) we need a policy based on sound legal advice, not on our
perception of what someone else
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 12:14:07PM +0200, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
>
> I think it's in our interest to ensure that people know the pedigree
> of distributions derived from Debian but we should do that while
> keeping relatively tight reigns on what is and is not Debian for both
> legal reasons and t
* Ian Murdock ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Re the organization formerly known as the Debian Core Consortium: No
> need. We won't use the word Debian in the name--we'll call
> ourselves the DCC Alliance, where DCC stands for "Debian Common Core".
That seems somewhat better at least.
> Re Debian ha
> I am not sure we should tell Ian Murdock how to use his and his
> wife's name. Don't send a request until we have consensus on
> that. If we do it, it should be VERY polite.
At this point, it's not even clear to me what the name of the project
will be, what the project will do or how or by whom
Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
>
>>I would encourage SPI to contact their counsel regarding this and that
>>anyone involved in the creation of this new entity not be involved in
>>any decisions by SPI on if the submark should be granted.
>
> I forwarded the first message in this thread to the spi-tradema
> Out of curiosity, does Debian's trademark policy currently say
> anything about use of the Debian mark by customized Debian
> distributions (in contrast with Debian derivatives)?
No. The assumption I've personally operated under was that Debian
referred not to a single lump of code but to the t
> I would encourage SPI to contact their counsel regarding this and that
> anyone involved in the creation of this new entity not be involved in
> any decisions by SPI on if the submark should be granted.
I forwarded the first message in this thread to the spi-trademark list
and Greg Pomerantz, S
> Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > "Trusted Debian" was an open source project too and yet the Debian
> > project felt their use of the "DEBIAN" mark wasn't appropriate. There
> > is an effort going on to update the trademark policy (which will also
> > make it clearer that it's not just about busines
13 matches
Mail list logo
