On 07/19/2016 11:13 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:15:24AM -0400, Richard Fontana wrote:
>> From a legal standpoint: a) does this make sense and b) what would we
>> need to do make it happen?
> If the idea is to have a new secondary mark - I would suggest
> discussing with the Red Hat legal team. If not, I'm not sure this is
> really a legal issue (other than in the sense of refining what
> 'Fedora' means).
My preliminary questions are: a) do we _need_ a new secondary mark for
this, or is it something we can just declare without involving that;
and b) in either case, would we need to modify the existing trademark
guidelines or could this be an additive guideline?
I think you either need to use the Fedora Remix mark or go through the
process of creating a new secondary mark, because you're talking about
distributing "things" that are marked in a way that implies that Fedora
made them, even if they're not at the same supported level.
I don't think its a problem to have Fedora people making Remixes.
If you create a new secondary mark, the existing trademark guidelines
would need to be amended to reflect it.
~tom
==
Red Hat