[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Please let's not talk about "clouds"

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 09:56:31AM -0700, Clint Byrum wrote:
> > The trademark policy is not clear on describing things which contain
> > Debian itself. If HPCS adds a special super whiz-bang open source but
> > HP cloud only thing to the images, its not clear that they can or
> > cannot call that Debian still. It would be good for the project to
> > make the policy on images clear at http://www.debian.org/trademark .
> I agree with that. In fact: the "public cloud market place" scenario was
> one of the motivating factor for revamping the trademark policy, even if
> in the end we didn't end up detailing that specific use case (we
> probably should). This is mainly because until very recently we didn't
> have much concrete evidence of "official" Debian images to benchmark
> against.
> Note, however, that the trademark policy does offer a sane default: in
> case of doubt, you should ask permission before calling your image
> "Debian".

I'm glad I'm reading this thread - it's definitely something I'll want
to follow up on for Google's images as well, since they do add three
debs specific to the Google Compute Engine environment, as well as
Google's gsutil and gcutil tools via tarballs extracted sensibly under
/usr/local. All of them are free software under the Apache License
2.0. The images we've put into the debian-cloud project so far have
been uploaded by a Debian developer - namely me - and we arranged
things explicitly so that non-Googler DDs can be granted the access to
upload official images.

is a clarification to the trademark policy planned, or should I have
someone email trademarks@ on behalf of Google to confirm permission
before any broader announcement? We're hoping to make a couple of
announcements mentioning these images in the next several weeks (I'll
say more about that in a different thread).

- Jimmy

Reply to: