diff options
| author | Jafar Al-Gharaibeh <jafar@atcorp.com> | 2024-11-16 19:35:08 -0600 | 
|---|---|---|
| committer | GitHub <noreply@github.com> | 2024-11-16 19:35:08 -0600 | 
| commit | 2f83660982bb111be83997a3e18d4cdecab16119 (patch) | |
| tree | 0c7c258b3f8a43e866ec9127c3df9aab3724f829 /doc | |
| parent | 66b0a33e0cb0aed16dc36d483e15b47cefbf2979 (diff) | |
| parent | 24eed7c2d2d2a044142f1149e516aba3536bbc4e (diff) | |
Merge pull request #17193 from opensourcerouting/frr-name-use
accords: guidelines/terms for FRRouting trademarks
Diffstat (limited to 'doc')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/accords/frr-name-use | 69 | 
1 files changed, 69 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/accords/frr-name-use b/doc/accords/frr-name-use new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..c2529e7a0c --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/accords/frr-name-use @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ +Usage of FRR names/logos +======================== + + +As FRRouting has become a popular open source suite of routing protocol +implementations, it has also become popular to use FRRouting as an environment +to prototype or test new features/protocols/etc. in.  Such use is absolutely +welcome (and a freedom guaranteed by the GPL license). + +However, references to FRRouting in such context can be misunderstood both as +endorsements as well as promises of current or future availability.  To contain +such misunderstandings, we would like to place the following limitations on the +use of the "FRRouting" name (or "FRR" where clear by context) as well as the +"chicken-head" logo (as they are ultimately "valuable trademarks"): + +- Advertisements, presentations, announcements, etc. of projects based on  +  FRRouting may only reference the 3 above-mentioned marks if the full source +  code of said project is publicly available (under terms compatible with +  FRRouting's licenses and without any access barriers) and locatable (either +  by direct link or a reasonable search) on the internet. + +- References to code or features using the wording "in" FRRouting may only be +  made for bits that are part of FRRouting's "master" or "stable" branches (or +  history).  This is specifically about the word "in". + +- use in previously created documents/publications/... is permitted +  ("grandfathered"), so long as the use retains its context.  Noone is +  expected to scan their history and eliminate references. + + +The intent is as follows: + +- you are under no obligation to publish code just because it exists.  The +  above are only restrictions on the use of FRRouting trademarks. + +- The code itself being derivative of FRRouting (and therefore containing the +  name/logo) is not considered use of the trademarks.  You do not need to +  eliminate the name from your private codebase. + +- pushing your code to github and/or opening a (maybe draft) PR trivially +  fulfills the availability condition above, and we'd like to encourage this +  as the "default".  However, publishing on your own hosting services is also +  acceptable. + +- please use phrasing like "available *for* FRRouting" or "we have implemented +  XYZ *using* FRRouting", and refrain from "available *in* FRRouting" or "we +  have implemented XYZ *in* FRRouting".  In particular due to the world-wide +  and multilingual nature of the FRRouting community, *in* carries too high a +  risk for confusion - and conversely, reserving this term also allows clear +  and meaningful signaling of some (your?) code in fact becoming part of +  FRRouting. + +- while "advertisement" may create an impression of "sales call" or "vendor +  presentation", this also applies to engineering processes such as IETF +  standards development work. + + +These rules, while lawyer-y to some degree, are intended to convey FRRouting +community consensus and help clarify communication.  We certainly hope we will +never need to pick them apart or even legally enforce them.  However, in the +spirit of all legalese: + +This document is not to be construed as any grant of rights, guarantees, +agreement or other similar, even implicit. + + +P.S.: note that "Free Range Routing" is not a name we use, and neither should +you - there seem to be conflicting trademarks from completely unrelated +parties.  | 
