Note for those who have never looked into this: the "official use" logo is the one with the bottle. Its license is non-free, fairly restrictive, and only allows usage after some official vetting by Debian, in various forms. On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 12:14:04PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > What is the trademark situation of the official logo? I was under the > impression that is still only to be used for Debian proper so isn't the > use of the official logo in themes quite problematic for derivatives > that do not derivate enough to change the themes? I haven't touched (nor looked into) the official logo. My impression is that that that logo is massively underused and basically unknown to most of our public out there. My personal take on it is that we should simply ditch it, focusing on a single logo (the "open use" one) with a DFSG-free license, that we do now have. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature