Re: Review-request for Mugshot Trademark Guidelines
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Review-request for Mugshot Trademark Guidelines
- From: John Halton <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 19:46:13 +0000
- Message-id: <20071204194613.GC4757@debian.borkwood>
- In-reply-to: <1196791499.5421.12.camel@localhost>
- References: <1196791499.5421.12.camel@localhost>
On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 07:04:59PM +0100, Heikki Henriksen wrote:
> However, I would really like some more (critical) eyes to take a
> look at the Trademark Guidelines before uploading, and someone to
> confirm or disapprove of my conclusion.
> Trademark Guidelines
[Lots of interesting but irrelevant background information about the
nature of trade marks omitted. ;) ]
> Mugshot™ Trademark Guidelines
> Any party wishing to use the Mugshot™ mark may do so as long as they
> meet these conditions:
> 1. They may use the Mugshot™ mark in association with the
> original Mugshot™ code found on the Mugshot Project website
> (see http://mugshot.org) without modification; or
> 2. They may use the Mugshot™ mark in association with a
> modified version of the original Mugshot™ client code
> provided they abide by the conditions set forth below; and
> 3. If they charge a fee for the CD-ROM or other media on which
> they deliver the Mugshot™ code, they warranty the media on
> which the Mugshot™ code is delivered, thus ensuring that the
> recipient receives a usable copy.
Paragraph 3 may be the first problem. It basically prevents "cheap CD"
vendors from selling copies of Debian on an "as is" basis.
> Except as expressly stated herein, no other rights are granted to
> use any other Red Hat trademarks, specifically including the RED
> HAT® and "Shadowman" logo® marks. Absolutely no exceptions.
> Distribution by FTP or Electronic Download
> If you distribute the Mugshot™ client code by FTP or other
> electronic download, you have permission to identify the download
> using the Mugshot™ mark so long as you are otherwise in compliance
> with these guidelines. If you are using Mugshot™ to identify the
> download, it must be in compliance with these Mugshot Trademark
> Guidelines, and you must also display the following statement: “This
> distribution of Mugshot™ is subject to the Red Hat license for
> Mugshot™ which may be found at http://mugshot.org/licenses.”; Of
> course, you are always permitted to redistribute the code without
> utilizing the Mugshot™ mark so long as you otherwise comply with the
> GNU General Public License. Please bear in mind that you are solely
> responsible for ensuring that the download you provide complies with
> these Mugshot Trademark Guidelines.
Someone with more technical knowledge than me will need to confirm
whether or not that is a problem for FTP, bittorrent etc. If I access
an FTP repository via the command line (or if I wget it from
http://path.to/download/of/mugshot.deb), how is the required statement
to be displayed?
If Red Hat consider a README in the same download directory to be good
enough then that should be fine, however.
> Modified Mugshot Client Code – Limited Trademark Permission
> Red Hat and the Mugshot Project support the extension of Mugshot™ to
> new platforms and languages. Red Hat grants a limited permission to
> use the Mugshot™ mark on these modified versions of the Mugshot™
> client code
Note that is only covers extending Mugshot to other platforms and
languages, not distributing modified versions for the same platform or
language. But packaging it for Debian probably counts as "extension
... to a new platform", especially given the stated purpose of this
"limited permission" being to make Mugshot as widely available as
possible (while preserving Red Hat's trade mark rights).
> provided the following conditions are met:
> 1. You identify your version of the client code as an adapted
> version of Mugshot™ in the “About” dialog associated with
> the Mugshot icon. The attribution statement should be
> similar to: “Mugshot™ client code adapted for ____.”
I'm guessing that's OK.
> 2. You do not prefix the named product with "Red Hat" (e.g.
> "Red Hat Mugshot" is not allowed.).
That's fine too.
> 3. The changes you make do not alter the fundamental user
> experience from that provided by Mugshot™ as made available
> by Red Hat. That is, you can: 1. localize the client code;
> 2. provide patches or bug fixes to the client code; 3.
> provide extensions or plug-ins to the client code; or 4.
> adapt the client code to run on another platform; but 5. you
> cannot substantively modify or remove basic components of
> the client code such that the user experience is altered. 4.
> You do not redirect the client code to operate with a server
> other than the server found at mugshot.org
Again, that's probably OK too. From a free software POV, it's always
open to people to do any of the unpermitted acts under a different
> It is very important that any modified version of Mugshot™ meet (or
> exceed) the quality level people have come to associate with
> Mugshot™. Red Hat reserves the right to require persons to cease use
> of the Mugshot™ mark if they are redistributing software with low
> quality and efforts to remedy the situation have not succeeded.
This is probably a key point in practice. It would be worth getting
Red Hat to confirm that they are happy with the Debian package. IIRC
the issue over Firefox/Iceweasel arose (at least in part) because
Mozilla were unhappy with some of the changes being made in order to
Debianize the software (e.g. disabling the built-in update system).
So in conclusion:
1. The specific requirements on how the mark can be used on
versions that are maintain the "fundamental user experience"
can probably be lived with, assuming Red Hat don't have any
objections to any changes necessary to make Mugshot play
nicely with the Debian way of doing things.
2. The problems are (i) requiring a warranty of the distribution
media, and (possibly) (ii) the notices required to be
displayed where the software is downloaded.