Re: ditching the official use logo?
On Mon, October 8, 2012 20:54, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 08:48:40PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> On Mon, October 8, 2012 16:52, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>> > Right now, the way I understand it is that you can, in a DFSG and
>> > way, create a document with the Debian logo & brand, and create a
>> > "certificate" that looks to be from Debian, and sell them as some sort
>> > of certification from Debian without recourse from the Debian project.
>> This is possible whether the official use logo exists or not: right now
>> anyone can create a certificate with the open use logo, which is what
>> everyone and their dog recognises as "the Debian logo".
> Sure, but the issue is it's legal with the open-use logo and not legal
> with the bottle logo, which means we have legal recourse when we use the
> nonfree logo.
The key point is that what the world recognises as "the Debian logo" is
the free logo. We can make certificates with the bottle logo all we want.
At the same time anyone can legally another certificate with the free
logo. I'd even say that people would more easily trust the free logo to be
"official" than a bottle logo they've never seen before.
In any case, it's still illegal to falsely claim that a certificate was
officially issued by the Debian project if it wasn't. You don't need
logo's for that.
That's why I think in practice the bottle logo has no real value because
no-one recognises it, and we have better ways to advance Debian than to
invest lots of time in marketing to change the public's perception of what
is "the Debian logo".