Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Robert Treat wrote:
>
>>Maybe you can convince pgsql.inc to make their own variation of the
>>logo and go forth with that?
>
>
> They are using it because it's the community elephant. They put it on
> merchandise because it's the community elephant. Why would they change
> it?
>
As long as pgsql.inc is committed to PostgreSQL as open source database,
and makes clear they're not the project itself but a commercial
supporter, I don't see a problem.
Currently, the trademark PostgreSQL is held by pgsql.inc, used there
since 1999. In case pgsql.inc goes down, a follow-up owner would have
continue in the same fashion, because strictly speaking the trademark is
only tolerated because the name is in use by the project since 1996.
pgsql.inc shows the elephant tightly coupled to the PostgreSQL name,
just as we do, so while the origination still seems unclear at first
sight the same rules should apply. By promoting name and elephant in
their publications, pgsql.inc and others make the PostgreSQL community
more visible. This is fine, and as long as those companies don't
advertise stuff which could compromise PostgreSQL (such as recommending
MummySQL), it's ok if they make profit from that (we're not GPL at last).
Conclusion: the elephant is publicly known as the community's logo, just
as the mark PostgreSQL. Everything fine.
Just another aspect: The current logo can be represented in very low
resolutions too, e.g. as desktop or menu icon. Any different proposal
should take this usage into consideration.
Regards,
Andreas