File talk:Btrfs logo small.png
From btrfs Wiki
OBSOLETE CONTENT
This wiki has been archived and the content is no longer updated.
What is the license for the Btrfs logotype? --Forza (talk) 06:50, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
- Actually not sure. It was posted in this thread where the author says that "Permission is herbey granted to display it in the Mediawiki installation at btrfs.wiki.kernel.org for an indefinite time. Should you need it for any other purpose, please contact me. I consciously did not license the code as GPL, CC or anything else, as this would mean people could use it for other purposes than btrfs. not the idea of a logo."
- I found that information just now and honestly I'm surprised it's not under GPL or CC, which in my opinion would be easier, as I don't really understand the concern about using it "for other purposes". As I'm not an expert in licensing, I would gladly hear someone's else opinion if we should stop using it. --Michal Rostecki (talk) 15:00, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- That said, I actually really like the badge that Fedora is using. Maybe getting a modified version of it (with the hard drives and butter) would be a good idea? --Michal Rostecki (talk) 15:03, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, I made the logo in late 2009. The current license for the Logo is "(c) All rights reserved." with the additional license for using it on btrfs.wiki.kernel.org cited above by Michal Rostecki. As I wrote in 2009, if you need it for any other purpose, please contact me. I am very happy to grant irrevocable licenses for additional usage models. I have purposefully not set it under an open license, for this would mean someone else (a third party) could use this logo and use it for their project, or even (in a worst case scenario) use the logo to commit fraud. As a logo is meant to uniquely identify something, usage by others is not desirable. See, for example, the OSI keyhole, which is copyrighted and a registered trademark. 1 2 - If the community (not just you) is aware of the potential negative legal consequences, i am willing to give it a more permissive license, though even here I would strongly advise to use CC-BY-ND or something similar. Again, just contact me.--ExplicitImplicity (talk) 13:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, and, as I am a bit surprised to see this as a low-res PNG, the SVG version is here https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/File:Btrfs_logo.svg --ExplicitImplicity (talk) 13:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, I made the logo in late 2009. The current license for the Logo is "(c) All rights reserved." with the additional license for using it on btrfs.wiki.kernel.org cited above by Michal Rostecki. As I wrote in 2009, if you need it for any other purpose, please contact me. I am very happy to grant irrevocable licenses for additional usage models. I have purposefully not set it under an open license, for this would mean someone else (a third party) could use this logo and use it for their project, or even (in a worst case scenario) use the logo to commit fraud. As a logo is meant to uniquely identify something, usage by others is not desirable. See, for example, the OSI keyhole, which is copyrighted and a registered trademark. 1 2 - If the community (not just you) is aware of the potential negative legal consequences, i am willing to give it a more permissive license, though even here I would strongly advise to use CC-BY-ND or something similar. Again, just contact me.--ExplicitImplicity (talk) 13:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- You contributed a great logo, it mimics (my interpretation) tree structures in filesystems and has good contrast. If you do logos professionally you're aware of how to protect them, but opensource communities may have additional needs in terms of use? I came here as I wasn't sure if I can display your logo in an article on btrfs features, I think depending on jurisdiction it's covered by nominative use (if it would be btrfs project owned?) but as of now it is explicitly restricted to "display at btrfs wiki". When looking around the community project landscape I found Gentoo Guidelines sensible, they do allow for community centered promotion, see name-logo-guidelines or OpenZFS Reuse of Logo addressing related projects. My use-case as btrfs enthusiast who is writing about it is not reuse/incorporation, only fair use, but I think people too who have btrfs related projects/tools could benefit from logo usage being broadened Wbob (talk) 13:20, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
- @User:Wbob, I completely agree, but do you think i should just unilaterally decide this? I think the best way would be for the community to decide on a licensing scheme, and i will then gladly license the logo under this scheme. --ExplicitImplicity (talk) 13:46, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
