Promotional materials for opensourcedesign

[evalica]

What promotional materials do you think we should have for when we go to conferences (like FOSDEM)?

Would be great to use this issue to gather the sources to get to printing, have some volunteers to handle them and also brainstorm ideas on the materials and ways to get them financed.

Note: the logo is available at https://github.com/opensourcedesign/opensourcedesign.github.io/blob/master/images/opensourcedesign-logo.svg

[ioana-chiorean]

• [ ] table cloth
• [ ] banner
• [ ] rollup? I am not a fan of them
• [x] stickers
• [ ] crayons ? as in a geek object that some might use - specially cool to use them to draw something

I will brainstorm a bit to see if i can come up with more suggestions.

[evalica]

Regarding stickers, I would like see 3 variations:

A. just the logo, in a circle shape, on a transparent background B. logo + "Open Source Design" words C. logo + website "http://opensourcedesign.net/" or "opensourcedesign.net"

Since this is the first year we will try to create some goodies, I think we should decide on a single variation. I guess depends on the budget, which currently is 0. Not sure how many we should print: 50? 100?

I prefer A in small size, up to max 4cm. So +1 there :) Unfortunately this kind of logo is just for "le connaisseurs".

For B. I tried to look at the old issue when we selected the logo and there were some ideas like:

• I1
• I2

although they are not usable as they are. Anyway logo design is not my expertise :) so other ideas would help a lot.

[simonv3]

I am plus 1 on the logos, and if they get made I'd like to get some printed as well.

[ioana-chiorean]

@evalica I have some concerns for A as the logo is black - mostly the machines present at FOSDEM are not MACs and mostly are black ( I think) - so a transparent background and a black logo might not be helpful - do we have any other variation for the logo? for MAC users this version will be amazing?

[elioqoshi]

Firstly we should plan on how we can acquire a small budget. A small crowdfunding campaign? Everyone chips in? What do you suggest? I'd be happy to help as well of course

[ei8fdb]

I'm happy to contribute some money to get materials made up. My preference would be for stickers and maybe some metal badges?

I like all of those logos above - but my favourites are the I1, and the second (right hand side - without the pencil. I really like the colours!) in I2.

Should we have a vote, or just get some of each one?

About other materials, what about some pens or pencils? Lanyards? Or t-shirts?

[belenbarrospena]

I am happy to chip in with some money too :)

[evalica]

A small reminder in case anyone thought about the sticker design. Thank you

[simonv3]

Someone point me to a website to print stickers and where to send them and I'll print you a monetary reasonable amount.

Or do it and give me your paypal account number and I'll pay you back for however much of it others want to split it with.

[belenbarrospena]

Me and @ei8fdb will be happy to chip in as well. I think he does know about some sticker websites ...

[ei8fdb]

Someone suggested we set up some crowd funding thingy, then send money into that and then use it to fund sticker printing.

I’m happy to do things either way. I use Zazzle.co.uk to print my “Don’t be a dick” and “Cyber purpleheart” stickers (which have proven MADLY popular!).

Either way I don’t mind.

Are we looking to get stickers for different events? In which case it might make sense to have them with many people?

For FOSDEM I think we should bring a few (hundred) if possible.

Any thoughts?

On 13 Oct 2016, at 09:58, Belen Pena notifications@github.com wrote:

Me and @ei8fdb will be happy to chip in as well. I think he does know about some sticker websites ...

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[belenbarrospena]

I think the crowdfunding thingy is a good idea, as long as it doesn't create too much overhead for the FOSDEM batch of stickers.

Just checked prices in Zazzle: if we order 20 sheets of 20 square, glossy stickers, the sheet works out at 3.45 (total for 400 stickers: 69 sterling).

[ei8fdb]

I’ll put £10-15 into a fund.

I’ll have a look today and see if we can get a low-cost fund thing setup.

Alternatively, I’ll go halves with someone for the FOSDEM stickers. Maybe we can then get £5, or €5 from FOSDEM peeps?

On 15 Oct 2016, at 08:32, Belen Pena notifications@github.com wrote:

I think the crowdfunding thingy is a good idea, as long as it doesn't create too much overhead for the FOSDEM batch of stickers.

Just checked prices in Zazzle: if we order 20 sheets of 20 square, glossy stickers, the sheet works out at 3.45 (total for 400 stickers: 69 sterling).

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[victoria-bondarchuk]

Just an idea for promotion materials: Privacy stickers for laptop and mobile cameras. Spotted them at ApacheCon EU this year. Open Source Design logo would fit perfectly.

Made by http://camjamr.com/ - blocking unauthorized web camera footage.

[simonv3]

that's actually awesome.

As an update on the open collective stuff. I think we're waiting on @jancborchardt to add some more people as collaborators before Pia gives us the reigns of the organization, but our organization is here: https://opencollective.com/opensourcedesign

[ei8fdb]

I like that idea. Excellent.

How do we get them paid for?

I know we’re a bit…uncertain..if we want money sitting in an account somewhere. And I get that…however companies want to be paid in exchange for making stickers and stuff ;)

How should we do this? SHow of hands who’s coming to FOSDEM and each person contribute $/€/£?

Does anyone want to try and get sponsorship for them? ;)

On 15 Nov 2016, at 17:25, Simon notifications@github.com wrote:

that's actually awesome.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[simonv3]

Hey! We now have a source of income in the form of open collective https://opencollective.com/opensourcedesign. We could use that money to print the stickers.

@jancborchardt, I think this will involve you as the main (only?) contributor to the project on open collective.

[ei8fdb]

I've contacted camjamr to see how many we need to order to use a custom image. I'll let you know what I hear back.

It would be nice if we could use our logo.

[evalica]

@ei8fdb great! also don't forget to ask them how long it will take for them to make them. Also hope the SVG format is ok for them, otherwise let us know what format they expect. Discount: I see on their website that they have a coupon of 15% until 11/31/2016 :) with "FALL2016" - would be lovely to use it, but it's kind of late.

@simonv3 regarding payment, on the opencollective I see the yearly budget, but do you know is there a way to find out how many money we currently have (and can spend)? Also, does anyone has experience how can we use the money on opencollective to pay for things like the camjamr order? I see camjamr accept PayPal and OpenCollective can reimburse through PayPal. Is there a way to make the payment directly? or do we need a third party that has a PayPal (in order to get reimbursed after - does anyone from us uses PayPal and can make the order)?

[evalica]

Opencollective: I just found it - our current funds are $54.20

[evalica]

@ei8fdb Zazzle.co.uk today has a Cyber Monday today with the code: "CYBERMONSALE" :)

P.S :) I'm not a spammer

[ei8fdb]

The nice CamJamr people have replied to my mail.

Reminder: camjamr make stickers for phone front facing cameras.

Hi Bernard,

Attached please find the proof for your custom camJAMR pack, please review and let me know your thoughts.

Typically our minimum for bulk/custom orders is 100 packs. However, if you are willing to wait an additional time beyond our normal production time of 7-10 business days we can offer you 50 custom camJAMR packs @ $3.75 plus shipping.

Their retail price is: $5.95/pack (for 17 camJAMR webcam covers)

Here's the proof of our controversial (!) OSD logo which they sent me:

[ei8fdb]

As a way to get some consensus on this:

Situation

We (OSD) have been contacted by OSI (Open Source Initiative) about our logo. While we don't have the full details, we think its about the similarity of our logo to theirs.

We don't want to p1$$ anyone off or act the a$$.

So we have to decide on what we're going to do about promotional bits for FOSDEM and subsequent conferences.

Possible outcomes

1. not have any promo stuff for conferences until we get this sorted
2. print them anyway
3. print them anyway with our opensourcedesign.net URL (to make it clear what the logo is)
4. use another logo, for a short-term
5. something else?

From reading the OSI's website, they're pretty clear on the use of the logo.

For number 4 above I had a look at some of the alternatives from the logo thread in the OSD website repo.

What do people think? I'm asking so that we come to some decision. No other agenda!

[evalica]

Not really sure how they could come up with that proposal, if you sent them the SVG from this issue. Anyway ... concerning.

Regarding the logo, I'm not sure what to say since I don't have legal experience and also I am not a logo expert so cannot say how many diversity it should be between them, etc. From an usability perspective it's pretty clear things are confusing :) and we now have our proof.

In case we need to print the URL (and this is desired in order for people to get in touch with us) than it means that the small/circle version is not an option anymore, since we can't accommodate text in that design.

[eppfel]

Never use or register any trademarks that are confusingly similar to, or a play on, the OSI or OSI Logo.

– https://opensource.org/trademark-guidelines – 5.1. Trademark Usage Guidelines

From my amateur legal knowledge, they could force us to change the logo, because of the line above. We would have to prove, that the logo does not "play on" on theirs to fend this off. 😁 Maybe there is a slim chance they allow us an exemption, because we do not produce software products.

Although the camjamr idea is nice, I would go for stickers with the URL. So kind of option 3.

[evalica]

I was thinking about our logo and my first thought was: "what if at the end of the circle we straighten the angle". So just for reference, this is how it would look like: I'm not really sure how I feel about it.

[simonv3]

Would that be enough for OSI?

[evalica]

Well, we could ask but I don't think they trademark on all black circles with something in the middle :)

[simonv3]

Who do we ask to ask?

[evalica]

First it's OSI, than GitHub might say it's similar :)

Regarding asking, @jancborchardt do you know anything?

[jancborchardt]

Sorry for the lateness here! Just replied to their mail and put you @evalica & @simonv3 in cc so I’m not the bottleneck. :)

[jdorfman]

Peeps, I work for Sticker Mule. I can have some printed and shipped to FOSDEM for free. Just email me jdorfman at stickermule.com

[massonpj]

Hi all, I just received a follow up from @jancborchardt (thanks for the reply) regarding the use of the Open Source Initiative (OSI) Keyhole Logo. I see that you have another design there. Let me run that by our trademarks folks to get their opinion.

Just as a point of clarification, conflicts are not just due to similar designs, but also fields of endeavor. The real metric here is, "Likelihood of Confusion." So a company with a very similar logo to the OSI's in the agricultural industry might not be a conflict, however as two organizations get closer in both industries/sectors or products/services, trademarks comes more into play. I think here, even a circle with an opening at the bottom might be a conflict because both organizations promote "open source".

This is tough for the OSI as we very much want to promote the open source ethos across sectors/industries and love what you're doing, but at the same time we do not want to perpetuate confusion with the public over our relationships with other organizations.

In the reply I received from @jancborchardt, he mentioned perhaps Open Source Design would join the OSI as an Affiliate Member. There is no cost to join and, as an Affiliate Member, Open Source Design could then use the actual OSI logo on the site in addition to a modified Open Source Design logo to, as @jancborchardt wrote, "pay hommage and pledge allegiance," thus highlighting Open Source Design's belief in the values of the OSI and the open source movement.

Patrick Masson - GM, OSI

[elioqoshi]

Latter sounds reasonable to me regarding what @massonpj said. What's the procedure about this?

[massonpj]

Back again. We just had a chat at the OSI and we were wondering if maybe Open Source Design would like to design a logo or mark that could be used by organizations working with the open source space to show their alignment/adoption of the open source ethos (a symbol, badge, etc. of support and shared vision/goals)?

Coincidently, we just had a request from Open Camps, a United Nations Open Source Innovation Initiative, who also wants to include the OSI logo in their upcoming conference to show alignment/authenticity (They too had originally used the keyhole logo as the "O" in Open Camps).

We hope this mark could become an "icon" for open source (which many think our logo is), and thus be used universally for those who want to promote the values, practices, vision of the open source movement.

What do you think? Is there a process for getting this going?

[massonpj]

Regarding @elioqoshi's question, Becoming an Affiliate Member is quite simple. The info is here: https://opensource.org/affiliates/about

Basically a representative of Open Source Design would need to sign the Affiliate Agreement with a cover letter of why the organization would like to join. You would also need to provide evidence of eligibility (https://opensource.org/AffiliateRequirements). Depending on Open Source Design's status, non-profit, user-group, etc. we'd need to see some supporting documentation (it's not very burdensome).

[belenbarrospena]

It seems to me that, until the situation with the logo is clarified with OSI, we should not print the current logo on any stickers.

However, I would love to take @jdorfman kind offer and get some stickers done for FOSDEM :)

We had a few logo proposals,, although a lot of them played with the idea of an open circle.

Should we pick an alternative one, run it past @massonpj, and print stickers with it?

[elioqoshi]

There is definitely a need for an open source symbol free of any trademarks. As a movement, that's also very important (imagine if the Peace or the Anarchy symbol would be trademarked, that would change the course of history).

I would be happy to help in that case (that might be a big discussion though)

[aoloe]

a unrequested suggestion: what about making a square or a triangle out of it?
only until a free logo shows up...

(sorry for the fast and furious draft)

people who know OSD will recognize the logo.
OSI should not have a much issues with a triangle that has a paint brush in it.

And, yes, a freely usable symbol for both:

• Open source / Free software and
• Free Software for graphics / graphics with free software

would be very very welcome!

[simonv3]

What's the latest on this? Does someone need to submit the paperwork for becoming an Affiliate?

[jancborchardt]

We just had a chat at the OSI and we were wondering if maybe Open Source Design would like to design a logo or mark that could be used by organizations working with the open source space to show their alignment/adoption of the open source ethos (a symbol, badge, etc. of support and shared vision/goals)?

@massonpj considering that the OSI »keyhole« logo is used for exactly that already, widespread and well-known – would you not consider releasing it as an icon to mean open source, being open source itself (and then change the OSI logo)?

I do realize that this of course will be a hard change but if we would test what people see in the keyhole logo, I’d wager more people will think »open source« than »the Open Source Initiative«.

(Regarding becoming an OSI affiliate, I opened a new issue with some things filled out by me at https://github.com/opensourcedesign/organization/issues/53 :) Would appreciate help by anyone, and guidance by @massonpj because the requirements are pretty loosely formulated.)

[bnvk]

I'm a bit late to the discussion. Thanks @massonpj for inquiring with the "trademark folks" about OSD's logo. While ours was definitely inspired by OSI's as per our shared goals. Ethically speaking, OSI's conclusion and position on the mater is unfortunate. As per @elioqoshi point:

imagine if the Peace or the Anarchy symbol would be trademarked

Both symbols have interesting and unusual (from traditional "logo" design) origin stories in that both anarchy's Circle-A and the modern peace symbol came from bottom up / protest movements.

Since OSI's logo appears to be a legally registered trademark and OSI is, with your request to OSD, enforcing your trademark- it seems OSI created their logo with the goal of intentionally controlling it's use. It's unfortunate that trademark enforcement stands in direct opposition to many of the tenants of what "open source" means to so many and humanity. It's doubly unfortunate that open source as a concept and movement did not have a widely acknowledged (and used) visual symbol for so long that a trademarked symbol ended up becoming widely adopted through grassroots community use.

While it would be some effort on OSI's part, I sincerely hope OSI will seriously consider @jancborchardt's clever proposition of releasing your existing and widely loved symbol into public domain to represent the concept of "open source" and having OSD create a new "branded" logo strictly for OSI.

[bnvk]

@massonpj you probably also want to contact Noun Project to update the licensing on this listing as I recently was reminded I had seen it (there) claiming the "open source" logo is in the public domain.

[elioqoshi]

We need to reach consensus on this soon as this is a rather big blocker for us. @massonpj We would like to discuss this together, so please let us know if we can have a chat about a few options we can pursue?

[ei8fdb]

Can we aim for this to be discussed on the monthly meeting, scheduled for the 7th?

That way we can aim for a large-ish attendance?

[elioqoshi]

Yeah we definitely should. Let's add it to the agenda. @bnvk had some thoughts going forward we discussed on IRC

[massonpj]

@jancborchardt You are likely correct that most people think "open source" when they see the OSI's logo, and not "Open Source Initiative." However the OSI logo serves a broader and more important purpose, that of a certification mark. Organizations that attach the logo to software must distribute that software with an OSI approved license. All OSI approved licenses ensure software freedom--to use, study, modify and redistribute software--what we all now expect when the "open source" label is invoked. If the software that is being distributed with the mark is not distributed with an OSI approved license, we have legal recourse to remove that mark, and seek restitution for those who may have been deceived. For example, take a good look at the packaging for the Wunderbar: https://commercetools.com/blog/2015/relayr-wunderbar.html

I can provide multiple examples where the OSI has stepped in on behalf of the open source community to address issues of open-washing and fauxpen source software. By restricting the use of the logo, we protect the integrity of open source software.

@bnvk Yes, the OSI created the logo with the goal of intentionally controlling it's use. Per our mission statement, "The Open Source Initiative Approved License trademark and program creates a nexus of trust around which developers, users, corporations and governments can organize open source cooperation." This is part of our own origin story, as written by OSI co-founder Eric Raymond in 1999, "When the Open Source Initiative has approved the license under which a software product is issued, the software's provider is permitted by us to use the OSI Certified certification mark for that open source software." Thus, the OSI needs to control the logo's use so that we can protect open source software and software freedom.

Regarding trademark enforcement being in direct opposition to many of the tenants of what "open source" means, I would point to the Software Freedom Law Center's article of 2008, "A Legal Issues Primer for Open Source and Free Software Projects", specifically the section, "Common Trademark Issues" (https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/foss-primer.html#x1-600005). I think the reputation of the authors, and their extensive involvement in the Free and Open Source software movement, emphasizes that trademark enforcement is not in opposition to what "open source" means and rather enables it. Of particular note:

FOSS applications develop reputations over time as users come to associate an application’s name with a particular standard of quality or set of features. Trademark law can help protect this relationship of trust and reliance that a project develops with its users; it allows the project to maintain a certain amount of control over the use of its brand.

The above is exactly our rationale for protecting the OSI logo: to ensure, "a particular standard of quality or set of features."

@bnvk, you also lamented,

It's doubly unfortunate that open source as a concept and movement did not have a widely acknowledged (and used) visual symbol for so long that a trademarked symbol ended up becoming widely adopted through grassroots community use.

I believe this is confusing cause and effect. The OSI founded the open source concept and movement. The OSI did not come in, after it gained success, and attach our brand to it. The OSI coined the term "open source software". Prior to the founding of the organization, no such label existed ("open source" did exist and was historically used in the intelligence sector, e.g. "open source intelligence", and of course the idea of sharing code dates back to the very first computers). However more importantly, using the Debian Free Software Guidelines, the OSI created a definition for open source software--formalizing a standard--and the logo serves to certify that licenses meet all of the criteria of that definition/standard, thus guaranteeing software freedom for users and contributors. The OSI developed the keyhole logo (created by Colin Viebrock in 1998 ) as a means to certify that licenses met this standard. The success of open source is specifically due to the work of establishing a standard and then promoting and protecting that standard, the licenses certified and the trademark. Thus it is because of the trademark (and the organization and principles behind it) that the logo is so recognized. (rereading this it sounds a bit preachy, sorry)

Regarding the Noun Project, thank you I will contact them.

@elioqoshi I am traveling through Monday, March 9, but would be happy to chat after. Let me know how you want to connect. I see you have a meeting on the 7th, I'd be happy to join you on this topic.

Please know we all at the OSI are very supportive of your work. You all are clearly driven by only the best intentions. I do not like playing the role of the heavy (unless I'm dealing with a fauxpen source project) and would very much like to see if there is a way to over come the challenges of ensuing the integrity and authenticity of the open source label, while acknowledging the growing open ethos driving all sorts of community development.

[jancborchardt]

@massonpj thank you for your detailed reply! We’ll move on finding a new logo / branding in https://github.com/opensourcedesign/organization/issues/68 and becoming an OSI associate in https://github.com/opensourcedesign/organization/issues/53 :)

[studiospring]

I'm late to the party, @massonpj but can I suggest a solution that takes in to consideration OSI's goals, the shared goals of all open source bodies and the perceptions (and misperceptions) regarding the various logos.

By adopting and modifying OSI's logo, organisations are unofficially affiliating themselves with OSI. The perception is that organisations with different, but similar logos are somehow related/affiliated. All you need to do is require official affiliation, by getting them to publicly abide by your conditions and only approve logos that you deem similar, yet sufficiently different. A style guide would help here.

People are sophisticated enough to recognise that similar logos mean there is some kind of relationship, but that the organisations are different. Take advantage of this natural tendency instead of fighting it. Then go after the "bad guys" who use a logo that is too similar, but will not "pledge allegiance".

The only disadvantage that I can see is that it will be difficult, but not impossible, for you to create logos that identify and distinguish new organisations/branches that really are part of OSI and not just affiliated. It would also mean changing the terms of your trademark and other legal details.

This way:

• OSI can continue to ensure the integrity of open source software.
• Minimal disruption to legitimate open source organisations using "illegitimate" logos.
• Unofficial affiliation with OSI is made official.
• Affiliation is made clearly and succinctly through all these wonderful logos.
• OSI can keep its logo trademark protected.
• Everyone is happy!

Love to hear where my suggestion falls apart.

[massonpj]

Thanks @studiospring for the suggestion, always happy to keep a party going! Your idea (Consent Agreements) was something that we did try, so it is obviously a good one! ;-) The most familiar example may be the Open Source Hardware Association's logo which the OSI approved in 2012. Our rationale and goals (see: https://wiki.opensource.org/bin/Operations/Trademarks/) were pretty much as you've outlined.

The problem however is that the responsibility of managing ("policing" - eech that sounds bad) these marks falls on the OSI, as the organization using the modified mark often lacks the resources to effectively police & protect their (and thus the OSI's) marks. Again, the OSHWA is a good example--that gear has pretty much gotten out of control. If you search the web you'll find many examples were unaffiliated organizations are using that mark, which then implies some association with OSHWA and ultimately the OSI. This problem would only grow as more "affiliated" marks grew.

In addition to resources for "policing" the marks, many of the organizations lack the resources for protecting the mark, namely registering these are trademarks in the various jurisdictions across the globe. Again here, trademark protection would probably fall on the OSI to register each adapted mark. We've spent tens of thousands of dollars just to protect the OSI Keyhole logo, and simply could not afford to pay for others.

Finally, we do already have an Affiliate program where organizations can join the OSI, and that membership allows them to use the actual OSI Keyhole Logo (https://opensource.org/affiliates). Additionally, open source software projects that assign an OSI approved open source license to their work can also use the Keyhole Logo. This use is probably the reason why we protect the logo so much, we simply would not want a similar looking logo from another organization to be used in association with licensing. Imagine the OSHWA logo being used by a project that aligns with open source hardware, but distributes proprietary software with the device.

I hope folks appreciates that the OSI has thought a lot about this (I believe the history here highlights this) and has tried to find ways that allows us to foster open source adoption (which is our mission) while protecting open source communities.

Thanks so much, and if someone has another idea, please share it. We're always open to modifying our current practices, and someone else's idea might be the perfect one we never thought of... "many eyeballs." Thanks again.