Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013

[Tobias Mueller <muelli cryptobitch de>]

Hi everyone :)

On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 07:51:18PM -0500, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> By that standard, Fedora isn't 'GNOME' either (would any distro be
> shipping GNOME at that point?) Firefox and LibreOffice are installed
> defaults in Fedora:
There is no "Fedora GNOME", right? Then I think the situation there is 
different.

I don't think that not shipping (some parts of) GNOME, or patched versions 
thereof is problematic.
> From my understanding, calling it "GNOME" is, from a trademark 
perspective. Especially if the name "GNOME" is combined with another product's 
name. The problem is, IIUC, twofold: Is it (legally) possible to have the 
GNOME brand diluted now while still being able to defend it later?
And do we, as a community, actually want our brand to be diluted?

I am very happy to have the second question discussed here.

My stance is that I am happy for them (or anyone) to include GNOME in their 
product. They have permission (IIRC) to name it "something GNOME". So it's a 
different product, i.e. not "GNOME". I am happy if they use our logo. I'd be 
more happy if they also silghtly modify the logo as they slightly modified the 
name. I assume it's relatively low effort and helps us to defend improper usage 
in the future and them to differentiate their product. If it's not low effor to 
slightly modify the logo, then I might come to a different conclusion.

> It really sounds like, to me, GNOME should talk to a trademark lawyer
> and/or someone experienced with brand management.
I've heard we have someone competent on staff ;-)


Cheers,
  Tobi