I asked a friend that know about the subject: Egil Möller to Rubén show details Oct 29 (2 days ago) fromEgil Möller toRubén Romero y Cordero dateThu, Oct 29, 2009 at 1:26 PM subjectRe: Fwd: [Bug 462247] [NEW] Spread Ubuntu material licensing hide details Oct 29 (2 days ago) Hi Rubén! First off, you have two separate issues here - copyright and trademark rights. And you might need a license to both depending on your usage. For commercial usage of the logos spreading Ubuntu you definitely need a trademark license. CC licenses (and GFDL for that matter) only handles copyright, which is fine for all of your material, except for the logos and the names (Ubuntu, Canonical etc). You could very well CC license, or put in the public domain, parts of your work, e.g. the full material but without any logos and names. If that makes any sense at all obviously depends on the material. You should also consider what you want to achieve - do you want people using modified works to spread Ubuntu in ways you hadn't expected? Then you need to give them the full material under a CC license and a reasonable license for the trademarks. Do you want to stop people using the materials in modified form to advocate e.g. Debian? Etc. etc. What is your relationship with Canonical? Can you ask them for licenses if you currently do not have the rights you need? Hope this helps, and don't hesitate to ask again when you have answers to the questions above... Best regards, Egil Rubén Romero y Cordero wrote: Hei Egil, You know about this stuff. can you please maybe give us some insight? R. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Evan Boldt Date: Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:06 AM Subject: Re: [Bug 462247] [NEW] Spread Ubuntu material licensing To: huayra I think that we are unable to make it public domain because the ubuntu logos are not public domain. I think we could add more license options like gnu fdl and ccby. Although canonical has a pretty well spelled out policy on logo usage, I think they may have to also allow use under an open source license, since it is included in the open source os. I'm not very good with this licensing stuff though, so double check all that. On Oct 27, 2009, at 5:17 PM, Ruben Romero