[Its.an.education.project] Logo proposal

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Eben Eliason <eben.eliason at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 8:11 AM, Simon Schampijer <simon at schampijer.de> wrote:
>> Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09.05.2008, at 10:51, Seth Woodworth wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does Sugar-labs really want to keep the OLPC XO symbol?
>>>>
>>>> Actually, come to think of it, it's more of a sugar logo than an OLPC
>>>> logo.
>>>
>>> Well, the XO icon and name is intrinsically linked to the OLPC hardware.
>>> OTOH it is a generic icon for kids. Unless someone has a *really* good idea
>>> I'd say go with the XO icon, for now anyways.
>>
>> The XO icon works quite well I think so it would be nice to be able to keep
>> it. But it is true that it is quite bound to the OLPC hardware. Some
>> possible vendors might even refuse to use sugar because of that or wanted to
>> have their own logo inserted. Maybe if the gen2 does not brand the xo-logo
>> on the hardware the use of the xo logo would work better.
>
> In truth, the XO logo was the core of Sugar and entirely developed in
> reference to software, and only later became stamped onto the hardware
> itself.  Initially, the design intent was to reflect the green bumpers
> of the laptop with the stroke of the XO figure, and beyond that we
> didn't expect the physical hardware to have any specific Sugar
> references.  It still seems to me that the XO logo really should be
> the face of Sugar.
>
>> Not even sure if the logo is not trademarked anyway.
>
> It is trademarked, but I /believe/ only in the context of computer
> hardware, which may mean we can still use it.  Beyond that, there is
> still the possibility that OLPC can do the right thing and open it up
> to us anyway by adjusting the trademark.  In reality, there are 3
> versions of the XO.  The first is the stroked version found in the
> software.  The second is the non-stroked version found in the OLPC
> logo, and the third is the one found on the XO hardware (which has
> rounded inner corners for some reason).  The "Sugar" XO, oddly, is the
> trademarked one, but again, perhaps that's the wrong thing.
>

Personally I would suggest going to something different if for no
other reason than it allows you to not have to deal with too much IP
issues.
Looking up some stuff last night.. I found that the glucose image and
sucrose images are interlocking X's and O's . Using that might be a
better image.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Beta-D-glucose-3D-vdW.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glucose

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:D-glucose-chain-3D-balls.png

Of course.. I worry about the diabetic message :).



> - Eben
> _______________________________________________
> Its.an.education.project mailing list
> Its.an.education.project at tema.lo-res.org
> http://lists.lo-res.org/mailman/listinfo/its.an.education.project
>



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"