[06:44] <Kilos> o/
[07:53] <popey> Morning
[09:44] <ahoneybun> o/
[09:47] <Kilos> o/
[09:47] <popey> o/
[09:49] <ahoneybun> heyo Kilos and popey
[09:49] <Kilos> hi ahoneybun popey
[11:56] <Kilos> popey you having any success with spreadubuntu
[11:56] <popey> no
[11:56] <Kilos> oh my
[11:56] <Kilos> recruit helpers
[11:56] <popey> it would be somewhat easier if the person hosting the actual site looked at this
[11:57] <popey> as it's hard to replicate
[11:57] <Kilos> can you mail a request to him or even via me, just explain what you need done
[11:58] <Kilos> mainly so i can understand as well
[11:58] <popey> Well, it's not what I need done.
[11:58] <Kilos> hehe
[11:58] <popey> Whoever has access to the box which has the site on needs to debug what's going on
[11:58] <popey> look at logs etc
[11:58] <Kilos> ok explain what he needs to do in the mail
[11:58] <Kilos> is that ok?
[11:59] <Kilos> i cant get into rt.ubuntu.com either so i have no idea whats wrong
[11:59] <popey> ok, but I'm kinda surprised this hasn't been done already
[11:59] <popey> adding me into the mix to just say "hey, have you actually looked at the logs" seems a bit late
[12:01] <popey> but sure
[12:01] <Kilos> he told me once he has no time to do much of anything anymore,
[12:01] <Kilos> life seems to have taken control of him
[12:02] <Kilos> i didnt want to dig too deep in his hassles
[12:03] <popey> ok
[12:03] <popey> mail sent
[12:03] <Kilos> ty sir
[12:08] <popey> np
[18:08] <ahoneybun> mhall119, who do I talk to about stickers with the Kubuntu logo?
[18:45] <mhall119> ahoneybun: somebody who makes stickers
[18:47] <mhall119> ahoneybun: try the unixstickers.com folks
[18:48] <knome> ahoneybun, ^ they are our officially endorsed vendor for stickers
[18:48] <ahoneybun> knome, well now they are
[18:49] <ahoneybun> mhall119, I don't want to hit legal issues
[18:49] <knome> ahoneybun, "now"?
[18:49] <knome> ahoneybun, they've been for a while, we specifically mention them on our website as well
[18:49] <knome> in return for that, they basically give us free stickers for every N purchases
[18:49] <knome> you need to talk with pleia2 about the details as she's the one who's worked with them
[18:50] <ahoneybun> thanks knome they had been talking to Canonical for a while to make them though
[18:50] <mhall119> ahoneybun: I think they assumed they couldn't at some point, but after talking with Canonical they were given the green light
[18:51] <knome> ok, time to go do something else
[18:51] <knome> have a nice evening!
[18:52] <ahoneybun> pleia2, Kubuntu stickers from unixstickers?
[18:57] <ahoneybun> mhall119, I know the logos have legal hoops over them to use
[19:05] <mhall119> ahoneybun: only if you're doing something outside the existing trademark grand
[19:05] <mhall119> grant
[19:08] <ahoneybun> mhall119, which I don't know what it is
[19:10] <mhall119> ahoneybun: http://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/intellectual-property-policy Section 7
[19:10] <mhall119> IIRC, unixsticker.com was concerned about whether or not their selling of stickers would be a commercial use or not
[19:10] <ahoneybun> mhall119, Canonical's legal decisions are odd to be nice
[19:10] <mhall119> either way, the've been given the okay to use the marks in stickers, so there shouldn't be any problem with them using Kubuntu
[19:12] <mhall119> ahoneybun: oh I know it, the only clear lines would be "nobody else can use it, ever" and "anybody can use it for anything", Canonical is trying to navigate a reasonable path between those two extremes
[19:12] <ahoneybun> I know it is very tough to be fair when it comes to keeping a bottom line
[19:13] <mhall119> this isn't even about money, it's about reputation
[19:13] <mhall119> you wouldn't want some company selling "Kubuntu" that they had modified to include backdoors and keyloggers
[19:14] <mhall119> we can't stop them from doing that with the code, but we can stop them from telling people that their monstrosity is "Kubuntu"
[21:57] <tsimonq2> mhall119: (CC wxl) speaking of http://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/intellectual-property-policy , Section 4 states a few different flavors. So the flavors not listed are not covered? How's that work?
[21:58] <wxl> tsimonq2: from what i know from redwolf, he had to ask canonical legal for the right to use lubuntu on lubuntu.me.
[21:58] <mhall119> tsimonq2: probably those were all the official once when the policy was drafted
[21:59] <tsimonq2> mhall119: what kind of makes me confused is this statement: "Canonical’s Trademarks (registered in word and logo form) include:"
[22:00] <tsimonq2> mhall119: I'm no lawyer, but shouldn't that be s/include/include but are not limited to/ ?
[22:00] <mhall119> what confuses you about that?
[22:00] <tsimonq2> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[22:00] <mhall119> meh, that's lawyer-level details
[22:02] <tsimonq2> I mean, if they cite specific flavors, it might be worth it to update to remove the specific flavors and add an umbrella statement such as, "All flavors officiall recognized by the Ubuntu Community" (maybe add "Council" on the end of that)
[22:02] <tsimonq2> mhall119: what about Snappy?
[22:02] <mhall119> file a bug against lp:ubuntu-website-content if you'd like
[22:03] <mhall119> "snappy" isn't really the official name of anything
[22:03] <mhall119> "snapd", "snapcraft", "snap-confine", etc are
[22:03] <wxl> s/snappy/ubuntu core/
[22:03] <tsimonq2> mhall119: is there any way that bug report can be brought to the attention of the legal team? (subscribing)
[22:03] <tsimonq2> good point wxl
[22:04] <mhall119> tsimonq2: the web team will most likely bring it up with them when they triage the bug
[22:04] <tsimonq2> ok, thanks mhall119