New logo

[Jaroslaw Staniek]

On 12 October 2011 14:55, Sebastian Sauer <mail at dipe.org> wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 12:27 PM, Markus Slopianka wrote:
>>
>> On Mittwoch 12 Oktober 2011 09:56:02 Sebastian Sauer wrote:
>>
>>> No, it is Calligra's brand any that's it. The Calligra community will
>>> decide and nobody else.
>>
>> KDE is the community and as long as Calligra uses KDE's infrastructure,
>> you are bound by
>> certain rules and that means no unfree media.
>
> 1. That is not what you wrote, what I replied to and what this is about. Let
> me remind you. Your statement was
>
> <quote>
>
> You know that as a KDE project, it's not just "your" brand, right?
>
> </quote>
>
> That is wrong. You should know that the e.V. decided it cannot decide on
> such things. If you really care then you would not have put such a
> stupid sentence onto a mailinglist of a project with our recent history.
>
> 2. You know that KDE has a simple rule that is still valid? Let me
> provide you are reminder: "Those who codes decides."
>
> Now compare that with my reply: "The Calligra community will decide and
> nobody else."
>
> You don't really like to argue against that or?
>
>> That said, Copyright and Trademarks are still completely different things.
>> You (or KDE eV)
>> can trademark a logo while the SVG source is still CC-SA/LGPL.
>
> Yes. Thanks for that good and productive closer even if the opening is still
> questionable.

To indicate that Debian is not the ideal example how 'extremely open'
parties could act (I don't believe it's possible to be extremely open
as some suggest), it is enough to mention there that the Debian
project publishes two logos [1]. Apparently, further changes to
trademarks are in progress [2] so the situation can change in either
open of closed side.

1. The open logo is clearly not as open as LGPL:
"Copyright (c) 1999 Software in the Public Interest This logo or a
modified version may be used by anyone to refer to the Debian project,
but does not indicate endorsement by the project."
So the rule is in conflict with LGPL since I cannot use it to, say,
sell washing powder. I have to intentionally _refer_ the project.

2. The closed logo is clearly part of certification (adhering to
development process and so on) for some approved products. It's of
course not only close for modification but even nobody can sell
t-shirts with it.

I say the above not to criticize debians but to close the topic. I
especially like the idea of official logo for 'certified distributors'
(e.g. those that package properly, do not break compatibility of the
software by downstream patching). Perhaps the 'open' logo can be born
later if there's such request.
For now I would go with the official 'certified' Calligra logo
wherever possible - its use have to be public indication we treat the
users and our work seriously.

[1] http://www.debian.org/logos
[2] Look for 'Debian trademark' section at
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce

-- 
regards / pozdrawiam, Jaroslaw Staniek
 http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek
 Kexi & Calligra (kexi-project.org, identi.ca/kexi, calligra-suite.org)
 KDE Software Development Platform on MS Windows (windows.kde.org)