> The distinction is whether we are going to require companies to give us
> money to use our name or logo. If CP, SRA, or PostgreSQL, Inc. puts the
> logo on their box, is that OK? I think we need to decide how this is
> going to work long-term, not just in this case.
But it does depend on the specific case in question.
The PostgreSQL brand should be treated carefully as those using it will
be seen as representatives of the project. We should not allow others to
just pick up the logo or name and run with it irregardless of past
experiences with that firm or person.
If RedHat, SRA, or others released a retail product under the PostgreSQL
name, we should:
1. Hold them to a certain quality standard
2. Ensure it is PostgreSQL code that the product is based upon and
not SQL Lite branded as PostgreSQL 8 (unlikely -- but possible)
3. Ensure they provide compensation by (for example) having a
minimum of N staff dedicated to improving the public code base
or marketing efforts for the life of that product.
Despite everything SRA has done in the past, if a new CEO came by and
said they were forking the project and taking all staff off the public
project, we should not allow them to continue use of the PostgreSQL
brand. This requires protecting it in the first place. SRA could not
have received blanket authorization to use the logo to start with.
Not only should we take a reasonable cut (in this case) but we should
require a certain quality level in the product they put our logo.
Nothing worse than having your logo on a T-Shirt that disintegrates
during the first wash.
In response to
pgsql-www by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-04-29 19:26:05|
|Subject: Re: What can we learn from MySQL?|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2004-04-29 18:45:58|
|Subject: Re: Promoting PostgreSQL to the world.|