[Sugar-devel] [SLOBS] [SLOB] xo-computer icon

Laura Vargas laura at somosazucar.org
Thu Sep 14 07:40:24 EDT 2017


Nobody needs to be a lawyer to understand this.

*We (sugar labs users) simply didn't have permission to do use therefore it
was removed.*

Any one else interested in Sugar UI in the Community is welcome to join
forces and help me address this issue as an opportunity for the Community
to work together engaging in a Collaborative Design Dynamic and if required
define a more suitable substitute for Sebastian's commit.

I personally love the feet. They set a clear starting point for the Sugar
experience and they look very cute. Try it changing the colors here, see
how it looks:


My young children really liked them, also several teachers in SM.

I will test further among our programming students as well.


2017-09-14 6:08 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>:

> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Laura Vargas <laura at somosazucar.org>
> wrote:
>> Legislation in Latinamerica is very restrictive regarding Trademark
>> policies.
>> If OLPC fans want to keep the old logo in their own version of Sugar that
>> is OK, but not possible in the main branch.
> Laura,
> I would appreciate you stop you speculations and assertions about
> trademark law and let Tony do his job. He asked some very specific
> questions. I would appreciate that you try to address them.
> regards.
> -walter
>> Regards
>> 2017-09-13 19:48 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>:
>>> 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>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SLOBs mailing list
>>> SLOBs at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>> --
>> Laura V.
>> * I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>> “Solo la tecnología libre nos hará libres.”
>> ~ L. Victoria
>> Happy Learning!
>> #LearningByDoing
>> #Projects4good
>> #IDesignATSugarLabs
>> #WeCanDoBetter
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> <http://www.sugarlabs.org>

Laura V.
* I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org*

“Solo la tecnología libre nos hará libres.”
~ L. Victoria

Happy Learning!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20170914/9dd94c38/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Sugar-devel mailing list