cloudstack-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Amy Lindberg <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] CloudStack PMC taking on direct management of our trademark?
Date Wed, 16 Jul 2014 02:11:58 GMT
I am getting ready to start pulling together a simple brand guide. I was
thinking about something similar to Skype and include the link below.  I
thought maybe we could just add a link to the website? Does anyone have any
objections before I get started?

*Amy Lindberg*
Director of Operations

Office +1.800.735.7104  |  Direct +1.515.612.7792
Mobile +1.515.250.7003 |

The information in this message is intended for the named recipients only.
It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise
protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking
of any action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not print it or
disseminate it or its contents. In such event, please notify the sender by
return e-mail and delete the e-mail file immediately thereafter. Thank you.

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 12:35 PM, John Kinsella <> wrote:

>  +1
>  And a formal brand guide would be great to have IMHO.
>  On Jul 7, 2014, at 9:04 AM, Chip Childers <>
> wrote:
> ( and have been
> BCC'ed so they are aware I have started this discussion on marketing@)
> Hi all,
> An opportunity has been presented to us to allow the CloudStack PMC to
> directly manage our trademark.  I wanted to get a discussion going about
> (1) do we want to do this, and (2) if so what process would we follow
> for it.  What I need out of this thread is a gauge of consensus, and
> input into our approach (if you agree with the idea of taking over
> direct management). FWIW, I'm a strong +1 to taking on this
> responsibility as a project.
> As background for those that might not have it, today's trademark
> guidelines (for the project [1] and the foundation [2]) explicitly state
> a number of instances where the VP Brand Management for the foundation
> must explicitly approve certain requests (including, for example,
> non-software goods with a project logo).
> Discussion within the ASF board and trademarks committee has lead to a
> conclusion that (at least) CloudStack's PMC could take on primary
> responsibility for management of it's brand. The specifics of how this
> will occur (board resolution or trademark policy changes) are still
> under discussion.
> The current general opinion of those groups is that trademark management
> by a PMC like CloudStack would be done in a way similar to how our
> security team works.  The email list is
> responsible for handling all inbound vulnerability reports, and working
> to correct them with the appropriate committers.  The
> list members are automatically included in our list,
> so that they can provide oversight and step in to help / advise when
> necessary.  I expect something similar will occur for trademark
> management questions.  I also expect that we will see the
> foundation-wide trademark policy [2] be patched to account for PMC's
> owning "approvals" related to their specific marks.
> One of the reasons for this shift is the desire to scale the approval
> process beyond a single individual.  IMO, we need to be sure that our
> approach to management of approvals is similarly able to scale within
> the project itself (i.e.: I'm against a single individual being the one
> to have to always say "approved".)
> If we agree in principle, I would expect that we would make changes to
> our project's trademark policy [1] to clarify this decision making
> authority and our process / approach for getting approvals.  I also
> expect that we would modify our project bylaws [3] to provide for a
> clear mechanism for trademark approval.  Last, we would perform a PMC
> vote that signifies that we want to take on this responsibility to the
> board.
> So, comments?  I'm looking for comments from anyone in the community
> here, especially if you are someone that asks for approvals today.  We
> want to make it easy to get approval if the policy is being followed,
> yet ensure that everyone is using our brand correctly.
> I'll wait a few days, and if nobody else proposes patches
> to the relevant project documents, I'll propose them myself and see if
> they match up with everyone's opinions.
> -chip
> [1]
> [2]
> [3]
>   Stratosec Compliance as a Service - Secure Finance and Heathcare Clouds
> o: 415.315.9385
> @johnlkinsella <>

View raw message