Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [incubation] Website attribution/footer/copyright questions

OK thanks, I hope I've made the appropriate changes to our homepage now. I've also asked for approval for our derived logo.

Thanks a lot.

On 21/12/17 18:06, Wayne Beaton wrote:
Hi Stephane

I think that you're mostly okay.

What I look for is a strong indication that the project operates in an open manner as described by the Eclipse Development Process. i.e. open to collaboration with others on a level playing field. Any sort of strong "sponsored by" statement may act as a barrier for others to contribute. e.g. a community member is less likely to contribute to a project that they perceive to be dominated by a single company.

TL;DR: please make it clear that it is an Eclipse open source project, not a Red Hat open source project.

I have added a few comments below.

I'm pretty sure the trademark is now owned by Eclipse, though I think the copyright remains the same.

Yes. The Eclipse Foundation holds the trademark for all project names.

Note that the derivatives of the Eclipse Logo (the Ceylon elephant in front of the logo is derivative) must be approved by the Eclipse Board of Directors. 

Do I have to remove the Red Hat logo?

It needs to be entirely clear that this is an Eclipse open source project. We need to avoid any implication that Red Hat has any special status in the project. Having the logo on the page is fine in this case, its positioning feels wrong, however.

From the handbook:

Company logos may optionally be included on a project website, but only if the following conditions are met.
  • The company is a member of the Eclipse Foundation;
  • At least one project committer is an employee of the company in question; and
  • The committer is active (i.e. they have made at least one commit in the last three months)
Note that this means that any other company that meets the criteria should have the opportunity for their logo to be included.

Do I have to remove the "sponsored by Red Hat" bit?

Same as with the logo. Level playing field applies. Avoid the implication that the project is dominated by Red Hat or that Red Hat has a special status with the project. As other contribute, they get to play by the same rules. 

Having said that, I prefer the word "contribute" over "sponsor". e.g. provide a list of major contributors. 

I'd probably add the Eclipse logo next to the Red Hat one, and say it's sponsored by Red Hat and Eclipse, no?

In my mind, the project is not sponsored by the Eclipse Foundation. Strictly speaking, it's owned by the Eclipse Foundation on behalf of the community.

Note that the usage guidelines require that you treat "Eclipse" as an adjective. "Eclipse Foundation", "Eclipse Project", "Eclipse Ceylon", but never just "Eclipse" (yes, I still have a few occurrences in our documentation to hunt down and fix).

I think I have to change the trademark part, but do you have equivalent Terms of Use and Privacy Policy that I have to point to?



Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects
The Eclipse Foundation

incubation mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top