Am 27.11.23 um 11:38 schrieb Javier Llorente:

El viernes, 24 de noviembre de 2023 18:14:07 (CET) victorhck escribió:

...

El 23/11/23 a las 22:32, Douglas DeMaio escribió:

(...) I agree with victorhck. There are some nice logo designs in the survey but there is no "keep the current the logo" option in the survey.

Greetings,

Hi, I would agree. But. The geeko grows up and becomes more independent in the future. The current geeko brings legal problems. There are only a few differences to the Suse logo. Which no one recognises. There will be no choice to keep the old one. An independent logo strengthens the identity of openSUSE. It's still a geeko, the geeko. Greetings Marcel

On 27.11.23 15:36, luriv@gmx.de wrote:

The current geeko brings legal problems. There are only a few differences to the Suse logo. Which no one recognises.

There will be no choice to keep the old one.

Really? This would be quite important information which was not given in the news post. -- Stefan Seyfried "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman

On 2023-11-29 07:39, Richard Brown wrote:

On 2023-11-28 11:42, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

On 27.11.23 15:36, luriv@gmx.de wrote:

...

The current geeko brings legal problems. There are only a few differences to the Suse logo. Which no one recognises.

There will be no choice to keep the old one.

Really? This would be quite important information which was not given in the news post.

I also think it’s false

The current logo is a formally registered trademark

Changing it will either require SUSE to pony up a rather large financial and red tape bill getting that changed

Or, if we’re just abandoning the idea of openSUSE having a defensible trademark then there’s a huge change in the constitutional framework of the Project that hasn’t been communicated.

Policies like our Trademark Guidelines will be effectively pointless and unenforceable if the logo isn’t a registered trademark.

I imagine SUSE would require openSUSE to have a registered trademark as it’s logo given the project has the term SUSE in its name..

Given that, I vote to cancel the vote and keep the logo. Seriously. Even not knowing this, I would vote to keep the logo. Change just for changing? No. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from openSUSE 15.5 (Laicolasse))

Perhaps waiting for the results might be wise. Or being there when it's going to be discussed. Perception aren't facts; it's just an opinion/slant on thing with multiple perspectives. Everyone has an opinion and the slant usually comes from ones own point of view. People had an opportunity to participate or comment on the notes. No one submitted the 2005 logo as was mentioned in the article and wiki. Pointing to something after the fact is fine and I'm certain it will work itself out. But words to portray a narrative that is critical about an open process isn't something I agree with. Some people may feel that way, but that doesn't mean others feel same. I certainly don't, and I would like to see a change rather than a narrative that some might view as "stagnation". And with the trademark aspects, that statement is there for a reason. The phrase "If you don't know, you better ask somebody" isn't just military jargon. Silence on the trademark for the month between the submissions and time to vote isn't being railroaded in my opinion; there was certainly a sufficient amount of time. v/r Doug

I am new and an outsider, but I have to say that the accusations, insinuations, and anger around this is really not a good look. I have been using Linux since the mid 90's. There have been too many fights that split the community in that time. My thoughts, anyway. I found an issue with postfix and gmail that I was going to debug and fix over the holidays (an email to factory a few weeks ago). That is, I was about to become a contributor. Now, I am rethinking whether this is the right community to land. There are lots of topics to debate (e.g., security or user experience). A logo doesn't seem to rise to that level to me. The process seems more important but, on that, I don't know enough to render an opinion. However, I appeal to everyone...please don't make this personal. I have seen too much of that in the past thirty years. -- Tony Walker PGP Key @ https://tonywalker1.github.io/ or https://keys.openpgp.org/ 9F46 D66D FF6C 182D A5AC 11E1 8559 98D1 7543 319C On Sat, Dec 9, 2023 at 3:53 AM Richard Brown wrote:

On 2023-12-08 10:18, Douglas DeMaio wrote:

...

Perhaps waiting for the results might be wise. Or being there when it's going to be discussed. Perception aren't facts; it's just an opinion/slant on thing with multiple perspectives. Everyone has an opinion and the slant usually comes from ones own point of view. People had an opportunity to participate or comment on the notes. No one submitted the 2005 logo as was mentioned in the article and wiki.

Nobody could submit the 2005 logo without breaking the rules that explicitly prohibited existing trademarks being submitted

...

Pointing to something after the fact is fine and I'm certain it will work itself out. But words to portray a narrative that is critical about an open process isn't something I agree with. Some people may feel that way, but that doesn't mean others feel same. I certainly don't, and I would like to see a change rather than a narrative that some might view as "stagnation".

Have a look at every single reddit, telegram, twitter, or matrix discussion on the topic and you will find words from others than myself also either echoing similar concerns or just outright disliking the idea of changing the logo. I find this latest email from you to be obscenely patronising and unbecoming of an openSUSE Board member who is meant to represent the wishes of the Project as a whole, and especially it's voting membership.

...

And with the trademark aspects, that statement is there for a reason. The phrase "If you don't know, you better ask somebody" isn't just military jargon. Silence on the trademark for the month between the submissions and time to vote isn't being railroaded in my opinion; there was certainly a sufficient amount of time.

It took several years from initiating discussions on trademarking Kubic before it progressed. As I have repeatedly pointed out on several other venues, every single change, alteration, or addition to the openSUSE trademark has also been a process lasting several years. If you think a month is a good time for a topic of this complexity, then frankly, I think you're unfit to be driving this matter, and I respectfully request that Gerald take the lead, giving his professional responsibility as Chairperson.

-- Richard Brown Distributions Architect SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstraße 146, D-90461 Nuremberg, Germany (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) Managing Directors/Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev, Andrew McDonald, Werner Knoblich

On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 4:30 AM Stefan Seyfried < stefan.seyfried@googlemail.com> wrote:

Hi Tony,

On 09.12.23 20:25, Tony Walker wrote:

...

I am new and an outsider, but I have to say that the accusations, insinuations, and anger around this is really not a good look. I have been using Linux since the mid 90's. There have been too many fights that split the community in that time. My thoughts, anyway.

I found an issue with postfix and gmail that I was going to debug and fix over the holidays (an email to factory a few weeks ago). That is, I was about to become a contributor. Now, I am rethinking whether this is the right community to land. There are lots of topics to debate (e.g., security or user experience). A logo doesn't seem to rise to that level to me. The process seems more important but, on that, I don't know enough to render an opinion. However, I appeal to everyone...please don't make this personal. I have seen too much of that in the past thirty years.

I am "old" and consider myself an "insider", but I am equally disgusted by the way this discussion is going on, so you are not alone with this.

Best regards, and thanks for your upcoming contribution to the project. Don't let crazy politicians on this list stop you from fixing the technical stuff :-)

Have fun!

seife -- Stefan Seyfried

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman

Am I missing something, I want to vote and it only the logo, were the board vote this year? -- Terror PUP a.k.a Chuck "PUP" Payne ----------------------------------------- Discover it! Enjoy it! Share it! openSUSE Linux. ----------------------------------------- openSUSE -- Terrorpup openSUSE Ambassador/openSUSE Member skype,twiiter,identica,friendfeed -- terrorpup freenode(irc) --terrorpup/lupinstein Register Linux Userid: 155363 openSUSE Community Member since 2008.

Takk! On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 2:59 PM Knurpht-openSUSE wrote:

On zondag 10 december 2023 20:54:21 CET Chuck Payne wrote:

...

Am I missing something, I want to vote and it only the logo, were the board vote this year? The vote for the Board has not yet started. You'll get an email, like always.

-- Gertjan Lettink a.k.a. Knurpht openSUSE Board openSUSE Forums Team

-- Terror PUP a.k.a Chuck "PUP" Payne ----------------------------------------- Discover it! Enjoy it! Share it! openSUSE Linux. ----------------------------------------- openSUSE -- Terrorpup openSUSE Ambassador/openSUSE Member skype,twiiter,identica,friendfeed -- terrorpup freenode(irc) --terrorpup/lupinstein Register Linux Userid: 155363 openSUSE Community Member since 2008.

On 12/9/23 12:25 PM, Tony Walker wrote:

I am new and an outsider, but I have to say that the accusations, insinuations, and anger around this is really not a good look. I have been using Linux since the mid 90's. There have been too many fights that split the community in that time. My thoughts, anyway.

I found an issue with postfix and gmail that I was going to debug and fix over the holidays (an email to factory a few weeks ago). That is, I was about to become a contributor. Now, I am rethinking whether this is the right community to land. There are lots of topics to debate (e.g., security or user experience). A logo doesn't seem to rise to that level to me. The process seems more important but, on that, I don't know enough to render an opinion. However, I appeal to everyone...please don't make this personal. I have seen too much of that in the past thirty years.

I hope you are still willing to contribute! We sometimes have very heated discussions here :-) My 2-cents; I suppose the current logo could use an update, but maybe just something more like what we already have. I voted, but I didn't like most of the options. -- David Mulder Labs Software Engineer, Samba SUSE 1221 S Valley Grove Way, Suite 500 Pleasant Grove, UT 84062 (P)+1 385.208.2989 dmulder@suse.com http://www.suse.com

Hello openSUSE! My two cents. Marketing channel was never as busy as nowadays and I'm super excited to see it. We have people coming with ideas, people defineding current brands and suggesting new marketing strategies. In general more active people on the topic, who have proven that they can actually deliver content (e.g. a logo submission). Sometimes you need to announce a "controversial" article/post "e.g. let's kill the service, nobody is caring about it" and then suddenly somebody starts caring. To me it seems to be quite a similar case. A bit more co-ordination on the marketing side and we're set to win. ps. I'm a bit unhappy about comms with the SUSE branding team, which is somehow related but a bit of a different story. On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 8:58 AM ddemaio openSUSE wrote:

On 2023-12-09 09:52, Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 2023-12-08 10:18, Douglas DeMaio wrote:

Have a look at every single reddit, telegram, twitter, or matrix discussion on the topic and you will find words from others than myself also either echoing similar concerns or just outright disliking the idea of changing the logo. I find this latest email from you to be obscenely patronising and unbecoming of an openSUSE Board member who is meant to represent the wishes of the Project as a whole, and especially it's voting membership.

Please explain to me the difference between acting as a board member vs acting as a community member? I certainly don't speak on behalf of the board with this.

If the suggestion is that my position within the project infringes too much or carries too much influence on this decision, let the marketing team from Telegram drive it. I'll certainly take a backseat to the process and discussion going forward.

...

...

And with the trademark aspects, that statement is there for a reason. The phrase "If you don't know, you better ask somebody" isn't just military jargon. Silence on the trademark for the month between the submissions and time to vote isn't being railroaded in my opinion; there was certainly a sufficient amount of time.

It took several years from initiating discussions on trademarking Kubic before it progressed. As I have repeatedly pointed out on several other venues, every single change, alteration, or addition to the openSUSE trademark has also been a process lasting several years. If you think a month is a good time for a topic of this complexity, then frankly, I think you're unfit to be driving this matter, and I respectfully request that Gerald take the lead, giving his professional responsibility as Chairperson.

Point taken. I don't shy away from criticism and this conversation goes as far back as 2019? What do others think?

v/r Doug

-- Best regards Luboš Kocman openSUSE Leap Release Manager

Good morning, DISCLAIMER: I'm not a lawyer. On 11.12.23 10:27, Richard Brown wrote:

On 2023-12-11 08:58, ddemaio openSUSE wrote:

...

On 2023-12-09 09:52, Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 2023-12-08 10:18, Douglas DeMaio wrote:

Have a look at every single reddit, telegram, twitter, or matrix discussion on the topic and you will find words from others than myself also either echoing similar concerns or just outright disliking the idea of changing the logo. I find this latest email from you to be obscenely patronising and unbecoming of an openSUSE Board member who is meant to represent the wishes of the Project as a whole, and especially it's voting membership.

Please explain to me the difference between acting as a board member vs acting as a community member? I certainly don't speak on behalf of the board with this.

If the suggestion is that my position within the project infringes too much or carries too much influence on this decision, let the marketing team from Telegram drive it. I'll certainly take a backseat to the process and discussion going forward.

As a Board Member, you are responsible for managing the projects Trademark Guidelines

True.

https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Trademark_guidelines

This is _the_ document which facilitates any use of the openSUSE Trademarks, including by the Project, any derivatives, and all of us regular contributing members.

True. But it doesn't define the agreement between SUSE company and openSUSE project nor does it state the relationship or shows any documents/written agreements between the board and SUSE.

Any exceptions to the guidelines are only allowed after explicit permission provided by the Board, which you are part of.

True. Easy, you write a mail to the board.

Any changes to these Trademark Guidelines can only be accomplished after negotiations with SUSE, as the actual owners of the openSUSE Marks.

Really? Where is this written? Might the community see the paperwork between SUSE and openSUSE about trademark agreements? Does it include the Artwork/Logo explicitly? Please be transparent on this one.

One of the primary reasons the SUSE appointed Chairperson to the Board carries veto power is to ensure nothing slips through the cracks between the Board's execution of the Trademark Guidelines and SUSE's interests as owners of the Marks.

True is - SUSE is the owner of the Trademark openSUSE. But at least for the German Trademark register, it is only registered as "Wortmarke" (wording trademark) called openSUSE see [1] I refer to my DISCLAIMER again, but as far as I could research, there is no such thing as a "Bildmarke" (picture trademark) for openSUSE - means there is no trademark of any Logo that SUSE holds for openSUSE - that's why I asked for the paperwork between SUSE and the openSUSE project. Maybe there is a definition how the wording trademark is allowed to use, maybe there is a defined logo as well. But without knowing the details, it is all a big MAYBE. In fact, if there is only a wording trademark and the project is allowed to use this by the trademark guidelines. Than the Board can decide - together with all community members - to change the Logo of the project at any time. It has nothing to do with any trademark violations than. [1] https://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/marke/registerhabm?AKZ=004946729

Changing the Project's logo WILL require changes to the above guidelines, either to include the new logo as a new trademark (hence my questions about whether SUSE is interlocked on that matter), or to fundamentally change the relationship between SUSE, openSUSE, and the openSUSE Marks.

I question this, because there seems to be no SUSE-owned trademark for any artwork relating to openSUSE - there seems to be only a Wortmarke.

For example, if the new logo is not trademarked, the openSUSE project will be effectively operating under an altered logo using the registered openSUSE name.

Correct, same as now. Because no logo is trademarked atm.

Such behaviour would normally be prohibited under the trademark guidelines. Therefore I assume the Board will need to grant an exception to the openSUSE project to use/misuse the registered trademarks in this way. Even if the new logo does get trademarked, that will likely take years, requiring exceptional authorisation under the Trademark Guidelines meanwhile, again granted by the Board, which you are part of.

Lot's of assumptions here.

Therefore I think it's impossible to untangle "Doug the community member" and "Doug the executor of openSUSE's Trademark Guidelines" (aka Board Member).

Well, it's still one and the same person. So no. Doesn't work, sorry.

If you feel you are not not driving this as a member of the Board, then my point remains and is amplified.

Where is the paperwork amplifying your point?

I think Gerald needs to be involved at this point in his capacity as Chairperson and make sure that openSUSE is not putting the integrity of our Trademarks at risk. I think we need a firm commitment from SUSE to support, fund, and legally make real, any decision the community makes on this topic. In fact I think we needed that commitment before running ahead with any poll, but that's water under the bridge now.

Sure let's even blow up the topic and involve SUSE lawyers. Honestly, if the project does a voting - and I don't say this voting was done perfect - as we heard a lot of criticism already - and the community decides on a new Logo. Than the board should follow that will and adapt the Trademark guidelines. Of course the board has to keep that aligned with whatever paperwork with SUSE exists about trademark usage - BUT I guess SUSE likes openSUSE as a project and as a community, because that is what all products are built upon. So what you state here is a quite theoretical approach, that SUSE would like to sue or punish the openSUSE project, for choosing a new logo. I don't see a world, where SUSE Lawyers are willing to destroy their own community project, but hey - just my 2 cents. Best regards -- Thorsten Bro - Member of openSUSE VideoTeam - https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Video

Sorry, clicked send prematurely, fully reply below: On 2023-12-11 11:44, Thorsten Bro | openSUSE Member wrote:

...

Any changes to these Trademark Guidelines can only be accomplished after negotiations with SUSE, as the actual owners of the openSUSE Marks.

Really? Where is this written? Might the community see the paperwork between SUSE and openSUSE about trademark agreements? Does it include the Artwork/Logo explicitly? Please be transparent on this one.

It's not written, but a fact of life and history. SUSE own the trademarks and ultimately control how they are used.

...

One of the primary reasons the SUSE appointed Chairperson to the Board carries veto power is to ensure nothing slips through the cracks between the Board's execution of the Trademark Guidelines and SUSE's interests as owners of the Marks.

True is - SUSE is the owner of the Trademark openSUSE. But at least for the German Trademark register, it is only registered as "Wortmarke" (wording trademark) called openSUSE see [1] I refer to my DISCLAIMER again, but as far as I could research, there is no such thing as a "Bildmarke" (picture trademark) for openSUSE - means there is no trademark of any Logo that SUSE holds for openSUSE - that's why I asked for the paperwork between SUSE and the openSUSE project. Maybe there is a definition how the wording trademark is allowed to use, maybe there is a defined logo as well. But without knowing the details, it is all a big MAYBE. In fact, if there is only a wording trademark and the project is allowed to use this by the trademark guidelines. Than the Board can decide - together with all community members - to change the Logo of the project at any time. It has nothing to do with any trademark violations than.

[1] https://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/marke/registerhabm?AKZ=004946729

the openSUSE logo is a trademark registered in the US https://trademarks.justia.com/857/01/opensuse-85701835.html As SUSE LLC is the primary legal entity of SUSE under which all sub-entites operate, that makes perfect sense The above registration superseded the original "two colour" openSUSE mark, which was registered earlier https://trademarks.justia.com/786/90/opensuse-78690711.html

...

Changing the Project's logo WILL require changes to the above guidelines, either to include the new logo as a new trademark (hence my questions about whether SUSE is interlocked on that matter), or to fundamentally change the relationship between SUSE, openSUSE, and the openSUSE Marks.

I question this, because there seems to be no SUSE-owned trademark for any artwork relating to openSUSE - there seems to be only a Wortmarke.

As said above, the image mark is also registered. The Trademark guidelines also reference the Artwork page which details how the logo must not be altered: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Artwork_brand#Things_to_Avoid

...

I think Gerald needs to be involved at this point in his capacity as Chairperson and make sure that openSUSE is not putting the integrity of our Trademarks at risk. I think we need a firm commitment from SUSE to support, fund, and legally make real, any decision the community makes on this topic. In fact I think we needed that commitment before running ahead with any poll, but that's water under the bridge now.

Sure let's even blow up the topic and involve SUSE lawyers.

Honestly, if the project does a voting - and I don't say this voting was done perfect - as we heard a lot of criticism already - and the community decides on a new Logo. Than the board should follow that will and adapt the Trademark guidelines. Of course the board has to keep that aligned with whatever paperwork with SUSE exists about trademark usage - BUT I guess SUSE likes openSUSE as a project and as a community, because that is what all products are built upon. So what you state here is a quite theoretical approach, that SUSE would like to sue or punish the openSUSE project, for choosing a new logo.

SUSE's lawyers must be involved, we're talking about changing, diluting, or otherwise undermining THEIR trademark which THEY own and THEY have ultimate legal rights over. Sure, we the community have the right to express opinions too, but I really think we need SUSE on board and need to be very clear about what changes they're willing to consider before messing with something we only use at their pleasure -- Richard Brown Distributions Architect SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstraße 146, D-90461 Nuremberg, Germany (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) Managing Directors/Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev, Andrew McDonald, Werner Knoblich

On 2023-12-09 20:09, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

* Douglas DeMaio [12-08-23 04:18]:

...

Perhaps waiting for the results might be wise. Or being there when it's going to be discussed. Perception aren't facts; it's just an opinion/slant on thing with multiple perspectives. Everyone has an opinion and the slant usually comes from ones own point of view. People had an opportunity to participate or comment on the notes. No one submitted the 2005 logo as was mentioned in the article and wiki. Pointing to something after the fact is fine and I'm certain it will work itself out. But words to portray a narrative that is critical about an open process isn't something I agree with. Some people may feel that way, but that doesn't mean others feel same. I certainly don't, and I would like to see a change rather than a narrative that some might view as "stagnation".

And with the trademark aspects, that statement is there for a reason. The phrase "If you don't know, you better ask somebody" isn't just military jargon. Silence on the trademark for the month between the submissions and time to vote isn't being railroaded in my opinion; there was certainly a sufficient amount of time. v/r Doug

how can I vote to keep existing?

This will likely be discussed in tomorrow's community meeting as we did give a feedback loop that was meant to go to https://lists.opensuse.org/archives/list/artwork@lists.opensuse.org/ or the Marketing telegram group, which has had tons of discussion on these matters. Just not some much with regard to the existing. v/r Doug