Hi Matt,
> However, as we've all said on this thread already, Canonical are quite
> nice about the issue in general. These are intended to be guidelines,
> which we should follow, rather than some kind of dictatorial stance.
>
> I don't really see how this issue is complicated!!
>
> Matt
It's not
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 09:21 +0100, Chris Rowson wrote:
> > Not really a turnaround. The trademark policy is quite clear on
> > modifying the logo.
> >
> > http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy
> >
> > Those have been the same since at least 2005, probably longer.
> >
>
> In which case nowt
> Not really a turnaround. The trademark policy is quite clear on
> modifying the logo.
>
> http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy
>
> Those have been the same since at least 2005, probably longer.
>
In which case nowt has changed then ;-)
So there should be no problem with submitting modi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Tony Arnold:
> Chris,
>
> Chris Rowson wrote:
>>> Organisations have to be very protective about their trademarks. If they
>>> are allowed to be used freely as is or modified, then they can lose
>>> their trademark status through general usage. Th
Chris,
Chris Rowson wrote:
>> Organisations have to be very protective about their trademarks. If they
>> are allowed to be used freely as is or modified, then they can lose
>> their trademark status through general usage. The Kleenex company in the
>> US had this problem many years ago. I think t
On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 17:18 +0100, Chris Rowson wrote:
> > It's likely that they were approved because Canonical have been quite easy
> > in the past about this. However Matthew's email shows that they are now
> > (rightly, in my opinion) looking to have more consistent logos used.
>
> Ah OK - So
> Organisations have to be very protective about their trademarks. If they
> are allowed to be used freely as is or modified, then they can lose
> their trademark status through general usage. The Kleenex company in the
> US had this problem many years ago. I think there was a big court case
> abou
Chris,
Chris Rowson wrote:
> Ah OK - So Canonical doesn't allow derivative works to be made of
> their logo anymore. That's a shame really, as I think it helps foster
> links between the community and Canonical.
>
> I don't work for Canonical - neither do most of the other members of
> LoCo gro
> It's likely that they were approved because Canonical have been quite easy
> in the past about this. However Matthew's email shows that they are now
> (rightly, in my opinion) looking to have more consistent logos used.
Ah OK - So Canonical doesn't allow derivative works to be made of
their log
On Tue, March 27, 2007 2:55 pm, Dave Murphy wrote:
> Chris Rowson wrote:
>> Also - when looking at the Demos https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Templates The
>> two sites showcasing the new theme are still using their own logos
>> ;-)
>
> ...and I'm willing to guess (but happy to be proved wrong) that ne
Chris Rowson wrote:
> Also - when looking at the Demos https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Templates The
> two sites showcasing the new theme are still using their own logos
> ;-)
...and I'm willing to guess (but happy to be proved wrong) that neither
of those logos are approved...
--
Dave Murphy - http
For example, see
> the recent advice from the Ubuntu webmaster for locoteams who customise
> the logo -
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/loco-contacts/2007-March/001196.html
>
> So, if redesigning the logo, please follow his guidelines.
>
> Matt
> --
Hi Matt -
If following the guidelines, it
On 27/03/07, Chris Rowson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For example, see
> > the recent advice from the Ubuntu webmaster for locoteams who customise
> > the logo -
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/loco-contacts/2007-March/001196.html
> >
> > So, if redesigning the logo, please follow his guide
On Tue, March 27, 2007 1:09 am, Dave Murphy wrote:
> Alan Pope wrote:
>> I was under the impression that we can't "use" a logo derived from the
>> Ubuntu one without it getting approval first. We have been through that
>> process for the current logo.
>
> The details are here: http://www.ubuntu.co
Well - feel free to use if for whatever, like I say - it was an
experiment, if you want to submit it as the team logo again (of course
if everyone is in agreement) then feel free, if you don't feel free
;-) - I didn't have a particular function in mind when I created it,
and donate it freely to the
Chris Rowson wrote:
> I've been trying to get better at using Gimp and Inkscape and have
> created some ubuntu-uk artwork.
That's how our current logo came about - I learnt Inkscape whilst I was
doing it!
> If anyone has any feedback, please feel free to offer constructive
> criticism as I am a
Alan Pope wrote:
> I was under the impression that we can't "use" a logo derived from the
> Ubuntu one without it getting approval first. We have been through that
> process for the current logo.
The details are here: http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy
In a nutshell, the ubuntu logo
On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 10:43:14PM +0100, Tony Arnold wrote:
>
>
> Chris Rowson wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I've been trying to get better at using Gimp and Inkscape and have
> > created some ubuntu-uk artwork. It's a single graphic type jobby
> > that'd be OK for a forum avatar, desktop icon o
Chris Rowson wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've been trying to get better at using Gimp and Inkscape and have
> created some ubuntu-uk artwork. It's a single graphic type jobby
> that'd be OK for a forum avatar, desktop icon or whatnot
>
> If anyone likes it, feel free to use it. If anyone has any
Hi folks,
I've been trying to get better at using Gimp and Inkscape and have
created some ubuntu-uk artwork. It's a single graphic type jobby
that'd be OK for a forum avatar, desktop icon or whatnot
If anyone likes it, feel free to use it. If anyone has any feedback,
please feel free to offer
20 matches
Mail list logo
