[U-Boot] Logo for U-Boot

[Tom Rini]

On Sat, Jun 09, 2018 at 10:21:53PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 06/09/2018 07:34 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 6 May 2018 at 12:31, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 09:49:42PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 06.05.18 18:02, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> >>>> On 05/04/2018 11:18 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>> On 05/04/2018 08:46 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>>>>> On 05/04/2018 01:04 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 05/03/2018 11:57 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 01.05.18 04:09, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 04/30/2018 08:22 PM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> U-Boot has currently no logo that we can use in presentations.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On the U-Boot IRC channel the following propositions where made:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Source:
> >>>>>>>>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Circle-icons-submarine.svg
> >>>>>>>>>> License: GPL2+
> >>>>>>>>>> (Alex used this in some presentations.)
> >>>>>>>>> Yellow submarine, nice.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Maybe we should make it a bit more toward teal and orange to improve
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> contrast ? Although, maybe just replacing the depressive gray
> >>>>>>>>> background
> >>>>>>>>> with a light blue one would do.
> >>>>>>>> How about this?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>    http://csgraf.de/tmp2/uboot.svg
> >>>>>>> Lacks the teal.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't want teal :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Without teal, the contrast of the image isn't good enough.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And I think you might want to check with more people, since clearly it's
> >>>>> just the two of us discussing it now :)
> >>>> Find Marek's darling appended
> >>
> >> It's a little hard to quote things inline like this.  But, did you
> >> create your own image inspired by the wikimedia one?  I ask because the
> >> wikimedia one is GPLv2 or later, but an original one that we could dual
> >> license (for both a new framebuffer logo, and for printed materials,
> >> etc, where a CC license works better) would be good.
> >>
> >>> I tend to agree that it looks nice :).
> >>>
> >>> It may mean we need a new web design too though, as the colors in the
> >>> logo probably don't work terribly well with the current blue.
> >>
> >> We can worry about that later.
> > 
> > I think the logo as here is fine:
> > 
> > https://www.xypron.de/projects/u-boot/images/Circle-icons-submarine-orange-teal.svg
> 
> This logo was GPLv2+. Tom, didn't you say we needed something with
> creative commons license?

So, while I'm Not A Lawyer(TM), there is a reason lawyers have made
licenses that are still "open source" but for other things.  One of the
uses of a logo is to be printed.  What on earth does GPLv2 (or later)
compliance look like for a brochure or a t-shirt?  That's not the
(usual) spirit behind why you would put a license like that on a thing
like this.  This is why currently projects use one of the Creative
Commons 4.0 licenses for images, hardware design, etc.

And further pushing my "not a lawyer", it's generally accepted that you
can go from CC-4.0 to GPLv3 (or later), you can't go the other
direction.  And I'd also really rather not put people that want to use
our logo in the position of worrying about what GPLv2 compliance on an
image looks like (as it's not clear), I'm strongly in favor of a CC'd
image.

If anyone can contact the actual author of the wikimedia image (it's not
the person that uploaded it, I dug that far) and have them agree to
re-license as CC, I'd be happy to go that route.  Thanks!

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20180611/8a515c77/attachment.sig>