Also CC'ing the Fedora legal list which is also concerned with issues like the trademark guidelines.
Paul
On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 17:16 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
CC'ing the Fedora Spins SIG mailing list as this concerns most of the subscribers there as well.
KH KH wrote:
2008/8/26 Rahul Sundaram metherid@gmail.com:
Hi,
I have been keep a tab on rpmfusion progress by reading the archives and it seems the repository is getting reading for launch soon. Congrats on that.
My primary interest here at the moment is creating a spin based on rpmfusion and Fedora which Thorsten Leemhuis mentioned as desirable in one of his earlier mails to this list.
I don't know if Thorsten ever mention such "spin" but having both rpmfusion and fedora on the same media is a very hard legal issue. Actually that's even not possible at all without removing the name Fedora from such spin. (meaning removing artworks and some others packages i don't remember).
FWIW, if RPMFusion wishes to provide and distribute their own version of Fedora, including whatever packages not in Fedora, either Free or free or not free at all, right now this is enough:
%packages # Remove the fedora-logos package and include something without # Fedora trademarked material -fedora-logos generic-logos (or: rpmfusion-logos if you have the artwork) # Include rpmfusion-release as well rpmfusion-release %end
%post # Substitute the Fedora name in /etc/fedora-release and /etc/issue, # which are both owned by package fedora-release, so that it doesn't # pop up in all kinds of weird places such as when booting the machine # ("Welcome to .... Press I to start interactive ..." comes to mind). # Note that _all_ trademarks are supposed to be in fedora-logos. sed -i -e 's/Fedora/RPMFusion/g' /etc/fedora-release /etc/issue %end
And you're done.
To be more accurate: You can do such spins for yourself (either with free only or with nonfree packages), but you cannot redistribute the spin telling it is Fedora. (because it won't be fedora anymore). But you can (have to ?) tell this work is based (derived?) on Fedora.
This (being able to say "based on Fedora") is pending the new trademark policy at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/NewTrademarkGuidelines
I hope this clarifies some of the issues wrt. a RPMFusion spin.
Kind regards,
Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip _______________________________________________ Fedora-spins mailing list Fedora-spins@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-spins
On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 11:21 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
Also CC'ing the Fedora legal list which is also concerned with issues like the trademark guidelines.
For what it is worth, I'm not opposed to this, but we would need to be very careful that the trademark guidelines are strictly enforced in this case, due to the nature of some of the rpmfusion bits.
Obviously, this spin couldn't be hosted on Fedora servers (or US servers), nor could we point to its torrent from Fedora's tracker, or advertise it on Fedora's website. I would encourage rpmfusion to handle these matters with their own infrastructure.
~spot
On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 11:27 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 11:21 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
Also CC'ing the Fedora legal list which is also concerned with issues like the trademark guidelines.
For what it is worth, I'm not opposed to this, but we would need to be very careful that the trademark guidelines are strictly enforced in this case, due to the nature of some of the rpmfusion bits.
Obviously, this spin couldn't be hosted on Fedora servers (or US servers), nor could we point to its torrent from Fedora's tracker, or advertise it on Fedora's website. I would encourage rpmfusion to handle these matters with their own infrastructure.
Right. I don't think anyone's requesting we host this spin, just doing us the courtesy of letting us know about a derivative of Fedora that will soon exist.
The secondary logomark/logotext does not exist yet, but draft guidelines allowing one are currently in review in Red Hat Legal. Until a secondary mark does exist and its use is circumscribed by some acceptable use terms, there's no text or mark approved for this purpose. In the meantime RPMFusion would be free to make some general notation on their web site ("We constructed this distribution by starting with Fedora and...").
I'm also anxious to see this secondary mark available for community use and am continuing to track its review progress.