[Marketing] [IAEP] [SLOB] Motion regarding xo-computer icon

[Sean DALY]

>> About the icon-debug, the goal is for the main Sugar branch to be
"libre" of Trademarks> global and future users should be
>>able to modify and redistribute Sugar as a 100% libre software and that
is what we all want, don;t you?

This is just silly. It's not because Sugar artwork is trademarked or
copyrighted that it can't be distributed. The copyrights are licensed under
the GPL, and OLPC's trademark has a long history of use in Sugar with
OLPC's cooperation - a formal license may be superfluous (a determination
which can only be made by a lawyer). The artwork file itself is GPL'd. So
this is just an underhanded way to bypass the community (and the SLOBs) and
impose a change. Just awful.

Sean.


On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Laura Vargas <laura at somosazucar.org>
wrote:

>
>
> 2017-09-15 10:24 GMT-05:00 Ignacio Rodríguez <ignacio at sugarlabs.org>:
>
>> +1 from me.
>> I know people tend to relate Sugar to OLPC, in fact I still do sometimes
>> (it's easier to explain someone that "Sugar" is the thing that runs in the
>> XO's).
>>
>> But the icon should stay as it was.
>> If you want to change the icon for your deployments just change it
>> (wasn't that what you guys were trying to say?)
>>
>
> Ignacio,
>
> First am glad you have decide to stay in the oversight board. Your
> resignation was not clear.
>
> I hope this means you are going dedicate time to the oversight tasks. :D
>
>
> About the icon-debug, the goal is for the main Sugar branch to be "libre"
> of Trademarks> global and future users should be able to modify and
> redistribute Sugar as a 100% libre software and that is what we all want,
> don;t you?
>
>
>
>
>> Thx
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 12:00 PM Sameer Verma <sverma at sfsu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Sameer
>>>
>>> On Sep 15, 2017 7:15 AM, "Samson Goddy" <samsongoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 15, 2017 3:12 PM, "Walter Bender" <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The discussion regarding the status of the xo-computer icon seems to be
>>>> going around  in circles. In my opinion, this makes it even more imperative
>>>> that the Sugar Labs oversight board respond to Tony's questions so that
>>>> Tony can proceed with his investigation in to our options.
>>>>
>>>> To state the obvious, this discussion is not about whether or not we
>>>> can change the xo-computer icon -- we can do that at any time in
>>>> consultation with our design team. The discussion is about whether or not
>>>> we make that decision on our own terms or be forced into a change.
>>>>
>>>> Motion: To answer the questions posed by the SFC regarding the
>>>> xo-computer icon as follows:
>>>> (Q1) Why is the XO logo included in the sugar-artwork repo now -- and
>>>> does the SLOBs want to keep it there?
>>>> (A1) The xo-computer icon has been part of Sugar since we first
>>>> designed and built Sugar (beginning in 2006) and we would like to keep it
>>>> there until such time as the design team decides there is a reason to
>>>> change it.
>>>> (Q2) Assuming the SLOBs want to keep the XO logo in sugar-artwork:
>>>> what outcome would the SLOBs *prefer* to see happen?  E.g.,
>>>> - Does Sugar want downstream users to be able to redistribute and
>>>> modify Sugar's codebase with or without the XO trademark file included in
>>>> the program?
>>>> - Does the SLOBs want downstream users to be able to modify and
>>>> redistribute the XO trademark image itself, or is that less important to
>>>> Sugar?
>>>> (A2) Sugar Artwork, including the xo-computer icon, is currently
>>>> licensed under the GPL and we would like our downstream users to be able to
>>>> use all of our artwork under the terms of that license. As far as the use
>>>> of any trademark image outside of the context of Sugar, we have no opinion.
>>>>
>>>> I'd appreciate if someone would second this motion and, if it passes,
>>>> the results be reported to Tony by Adam, our SFC liaison. Of course, if the
>>>> motion does not pass, we will need to continue the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> I second the motion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> regards.
>>>>
>>>> -walter
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:48 PM
>>>> Subject: [SLOB] xo-computer icon
>>>> To: SLOBs <slobs at lists.sugarlabs.org>
>>>> Cc: Sugar-dev Devel <sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As probably most of you are aware, yesterday one of our community
>>>> members unilaterally changed the xo-computer icon in sugar-artwork. The
>>>> ensuing discussion about the change is in the github pull request, "Urgent
>>>> fix logos", [1]
>>>>
>>>> The gist of his concern is that OLPC has a trademark on the XO artwork
>>>> [2] and there was concern that we were infringing and consequently
>>>> downstream users would also be infringing.
>>>>
>>>> As Sean Daly points out, this is not the first time that the topic has
>>>> come up [3, 4]. "In the past, OLPC was amenable to the use of the xo
>>>> logo in Sugar, but asked we not use it in marketing materials without a
>>>> formal co-branding licensing agreement."
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I think that OLPC was explicit in making the Sugar artwork
>>>> available under a GPL licence and that this is hence moot. But I am not
>>>> qualified to make that assessment. Consequently, I asked Adam Holt, our SFC
>>>> liaison, to raise the issue with the legal team. Tony asked us to consider
>>>> the following questions:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Why is the XO logo included in the sugar-artwork repo now -- and
>>>> does the SLOBs want to keep it there?
>>>> 2) Assuming the SLOBs want to keep the XO logo in sugar-artwork:  what
>>>> outcome would the SLOBs *prefer* to see happen?  E.g.,
>>>> - Does Sugar want downstream users to be able to redistribute and
>>>> modify Sugar's codebase with or without the XO trademark file included in
>>>> the program?
>>>> - Does the SLOBs want downstream users to be able to modify and
>>>> redistribute the XO trademark image itself, or is that less important to
>>>> Sugar?
>>>>
>>>> The answer to the first part of Tony's first question is that the XO
>>>> logo was part of Sugar from the very beginning -- before Sugar Labs was
>>>> split from OLPC. We've never changed it.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the second part: does the SLOBs want to keep it there?  is
>>>> something we  need to discuss. Personally, I think it serves its purpose
>>>> well -- a childcentric interface and it is "iconic" of Sugar. I see no
>>>> reason to change it.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding Tony's second question, I would want downstream users to have
>>>> as much freedom as possible: to use or not use the XO icon as they choose.
>>>> However, I don't see the need to expand beyond the context of Sugar. If
>>>> someone downstream wants to use the artwork for some other purpose, that is
>>>> not our issue (although I that the GPL license would be the relevant
>>>> determinant.)
>>>>
>>>> What do others think?
>>>>
>>>> Note, I think we should defer the discussion of what we would use as
>>>> replacement artwork until we resolve the current issue.
>>>>
>>>> regards.
>>>>
>>>> -walter
>>>>
>>>> [1]  https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar-artwork/pull/96
>>>> [2]  http://www.trademarkia.com/xo-78880051.html
>>>> [3]  http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2008-December/003059.html
>>>> [4] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2011-October/014245.html
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Walter Bender
>>>> Sugar Labs
>>>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>>> <http://www.sugarlabs.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Walter Bender
>>>> Sugar Labs
>>>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>>> <http://www.sugarlabs.org>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>>>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>>>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> * I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>
> “Solo la tecnología libre nos hará libres.”
> ~ L. Victoria
>
> Happy Learning!
> #LearningByDoing
> #Projects4good
> #IDesignATSugarLabs
> #WeCanDoBetter
>
> _______________________________________________
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/attachments/20170915/4d698052/attachment-0001.html>