Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.project > #9312 > unrolled thread

Re: Request for official help

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.project

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2017-07-20 14:00 +0200
    Re: Request for official help Russell Stuart <russell-debian@stuart.id.au> - 2017-07-20 14:50 +0200
    Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-07-20 16:50 +0200
      Re: Request for official help Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> - 2017-07-25 12:30 +0200
        Re: Request for official help Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2017-07-25 13:40 +0200
          Re: Request for official help Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org> - 2017-07-25 20:00 +0200
            Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2017-07-25 20:40 +0200
              Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-07-28 19:40 +0200
                Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2017-07-31 14:40 +0200
            Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-07-25 21:10 +0200
              Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2017-07-26 00:00 +0200
                Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2017-07-27 21:20 +0200
                  Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-07-27 21:30 +0200
                    Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2017-07-27 21:50 +0200
                      Re: Request for official help Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2017-07-29 02:50 +0200
                      Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2017-07-31 15:10 +0200
                        Re: Request for official help Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2017-07-31 15:20 +0200
                          Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2017-07-31 15:40 +0200
                            Re: Request for official help [and 1 more messages] Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org> - 2017-08-29 16:10 +0200
                        Re: Request for official help Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> - 2017-08-01 03:40 +0200
                          Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-08-01 12:50 +0200
                            Re: Request for official help Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2017-08-01 13:20 +0200
                            Re: Request for official help Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> - 2017-08-01 13:40 +0200
                              Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-08-01 20:20 +0200
                                Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-08-11 15:10 +0200
                                  Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-08-27 23:30 +0200
                                    Re: Request for official help Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> - 2017-08-28 01:10 +0200
                                    Re: Request for official help Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2017-08-28 09:30 +0200
                                    Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2018-04-19 14:50 +0200
                                    Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2018-04-30 18:10 +0200
                                      Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2018-05-03 13:50 +0200
                                        Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2018-05-03 14:30 +0200
                                          Re: Request for official help Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2018-05-03 17:40 +0200
                                            Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2018-05-03 17:50 +0200
                Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-07-27 22:10 +0200
        Re : Re: Request for official help MENGUAL Jean-Philippe <mengualjeanphi@free.fr> - 2017-07-25 15:20 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#9312 — Re: Request for official help

MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
> Any vendor then has threee solutions:
> 
> 1. Getting from Debian an official letter (see attached template) to
> say: a) we don't want any seller to send Debian without an EAN on a
> marketplace; b) we will not get our own EANs in the next two
> years. Such letter enable vendor to request for an EAN exemption
> laid on it.

This is odd.  Are you sure about this - or have you dropped a "not"
somewhere ?

If Debian did not want you to sell without an EAN then why would that
mean you should get an EAN exemption allowing you to sell without an
EAN ?

That seems backwards.

Currently I don't think Debian has an opinion about EANs but it is not
likely that Debian will issue a statement saying that we do not wish
things sold without EANs.  After all, in fact, we are quite happy for
people to sell Debian CDs etc and we want to encourage that - EAN or
no EAN.

It is not part of our role to make statements supporting (or opposing)
the EAN system.  OTOH we should do what we can to make it easy for
people who want to use such a system wrt physical artefacts embodying
or related to Debian.

> 2. Buying an EAN, but it does not worth to sell several things (eg
> architecture, live, installers, etc).

Why are EANs expensive ?  Is it that getting an EAN prefix is
expensive ?  Are there not arrangements for subdelegation ?

Also, is it really the case that Amazon Marketplace requires
everything sold to have an EAN ?  That seems quite unlikely.  There
must be lots and lots of small manufacturing (not to say "craft")
businesses who don't engage with this bureaucracy.

> 3. Getting an EAN from Debian organization itself, eg. on
> 
> www.gs1.fr. Debian thus would pay for EANs for his releases, etc, and vendors would use them to sell Debian medias. But would be somewhat expensive and not sure it is useful and project-compliant.

I don't think there should be a single EAN for multiple different
physical manufacturing chains even if notionally-identical bits,
particularly as Debian would have no way of verifying or controlling
the content.  So this does not work.

Ian.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#9313

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 12:52 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Also, is it really the case that Amazon Marketplace requires
> everything sold to have an EAN ?

It's not that hard to find out - certainly less time than it took to
type that paragraph:

https://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=amazon+seller+ean

Given they are cheaper in bulk, and SPI's home page says:

    "Software in the Public Interest is a non-profit organization which
    was founded to help organizations develop and distribute open
    hardware and software. Our mission is to help genuine, substantial,
    and significant free and open source software projects by handling
    their non-technical administrative tasks so that they aren't
    required to operate their own legal entity.

It sounds like a perfect job for them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9314

Hi,


Le 20/07/2017 à 13:52, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
>> Any vendor then has threee solutions:
>>
>> 1. Getting from Debian an official letter (see attached template) to
>> say: a) we don't want any seller to send Debian without an EAN on a
>> marketplace; b) we will not get our own EANs in the next two
>> years. Such letter enable vendor to request for an EAN exemption
>> laid on it.
> 
> This is odd.  Are you sure about this - or have you dropped a "not"
> somewhere ?

Yes, as confirmed by Russel. When you submit a produt, they want EAN or
EAN exemption number provided by them provided the trademark lets you
sell without EAN.

> If Debian did not want you to sell without an EAN then why would that
> mean you should get an EAN exemption allowing you to sell without an
> EAN ?

Because the automated system requires EAN and exemption requires to have
trademark registered or, for distributors, such a document from the
trademark owners.

> 
> That seems backwards.
> 
> Currently I don't think Debian has an opinion about EANs but it is not
> likely that Debian will issue a statement saying that we do not wish
> things sold without EANs.  After all, in fact, we are quite happy for
> people to sell Debian CDs etc and we want to encourage that - EAN or
> no EASure, that is why I suggest a nominative project, so that just Hypra would be affected, and others do what they want. This approach introduces flexibility.

> 
> It is not part of our role to make statements supporting (or opposing)
> the EAN system.  OTOH we should do what we can to make it easy for
> people who want to use such a system wrt physical artefacts embodying
> or related to Debian.

Yes. Hence an individual proposal, a template, instead of a general
statement aginst EANs.

> 
>> 2. Buying an EAN, but it does not worth to sell several things (eg
>> architecture, live, installers, etc).
> 
> Why are EANs expensive ?  Is it that getting an EAN prefix is
> expensive ?  Are there not arrangements for subdelegation ?

Well it implies an annual subscription, administrative registrations,
etc. So it is a cost, but maybe it is the only solution: the seller
should get an EAN or just not sell on such marketplaces.

> Also, is it really the case that Amazon Marketplace requires
> everything sold to have an EAN ?  That seems quite unlikely.  There
> must be lots and lots of small manufacturing (not to say "craft")
> businesses who don't engage with this bureaucracy.

Unfortunately, it is. Either EAN, either exempted numbers, either
registered trademarks.

>> 3. Getting an EAN from Debian organization itself, eg. on
>>
>> www.gs1.fr. Debian thus would pay for EANs for his releases, etc, and vendors would use them to sell Debian medias. But would be somewhat expensive and not sure it is useful and project-compliant.
> 
> I don't think there should be a single EAN for multiple different
> physical manufacturing chains even if notionally-identical bits,
> particularly as Debian would have no way of verifying or controlling
> the content.  So this does not work.

Right but if Debian could subscribe to such service, it could freely
generate as EANs as needed for their releases, installers, liveDVDs. But
indeed, maybe it is not the easiest solution.

Regards

> Ian.
> 
> 

-- 
Logo Hypra 	JEAN-PHILIPPE MENGUAL
DIRECTEUR TECHNIQUE ET QUALITÉ
102, rue des poissonniers, 75018, Paris
Tel : +331 84 73 06 61 <tel:+33184730661> Mob : +336 76 34 93 37
<tel:+33676349337>
jpmengual@hypra.fr <mailto:jpmengual@hypra.fr>
www.hypra.fr <http://www.hypra.fr/>
Facebook Hypra <https://www.facebook.com/hyprasoftware/> Twitter Hypra
<https://twitter.com/Hypra_> Linkedin Jean-Philippe
<https://fr.linkedin.com/in/jean-philippe-mengual-800133135>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9319

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 04:39:21PM +0200, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote:
> Right but if Debian could subscribe to such service, it could freely
> generate as EANs as needed for their releases, installers, liveDVDs. But
> indeed, maybe it is not the easiest solution.

I think it does make sense to have EANs for Debian, but perhaps it isn't
necessary to have an EAN for *everything* we produce.

E.g., we could have:

- An EAN for CD1, DVD1, and BD1 for every architecture,
- An EAN for the various live images
- An EAN for "the full set" of DVD and BD images

There's no need to have an EAN for, say, the armel DVD#10 or some such.

Alternatively, we could assign EANs on a by-request basis; if a media
vendor wants to sell a particular (set of) image(s) on amazon or some
other such site that doesn't have an EAN yet, provide a contact for them
to request an EAN for that set.

-- 
Could you people please use IRC like normal people?!?

  -- Amaya Rodrigo Sastre, trying to quiet down the buzz in the DebConf 2008
     Hacklab

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9320

On Tue, 25 Jul 2017, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 04:39:21PM +0200, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote:
> > Right but if Debian could subscribe to such service, it could freely
> > generate as EANs as needed for their releases, installers, liveDVDs. But
> > indeed, maybe it is not the easiest solution.
> 
> I think it does make sense to have EANs for Debian, but perhaps it isn't
> necessary to have an EAN for *everything* we produce.
> 
> E.g., we could have:
> 
> - An EAN for CD1, DVD1, and BD1 for every architecture,
> - An EAN for the various live images
> - An EAN for "the full set" of DVD and BD images
> 
> There's no need to have an EAN for, say, the armel DVD#10 or some such.
> 
> Alternatively, we could assign EANs on a by-request basis; if a media
> vendor wants to sell a particular (set of) image(s) on amazon or some
> other such site that doesn't have an EAN yet, provide a contact for them
> to request an EAN for that set.

Run that through some legal advice, though.  If "we" (Debian, SPI, etc)
get to be co-responsible for the actions of someone using our EANs with
permission [in some relevant juridisction], it is best to not have them
in the first place.

-- 
  Henrique Holschuh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9322

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:

> Run that through some legal advice, though.  If "we" (Debian, SPI, etc)
> get to be co-responsible for the actions of someone using our EANs with
> permission [in some relevant juridisction], it is best to not have them
> in the first place.

I'm inclined to agree…  Jean-Phillipe, is there no other way you can ship
these images? I would be very happy to write/sign some kind of "yeah this
is really all fine" document but am wary of going doing some kind of
official EAN registration thing that might tie us to .. well, who knows.


Regards,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb, Debian Project Leader
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9323

Chris Lamb writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Run that through some legal advice, though.  If "we" (Debian, SPI, etc)
> > get to be co-responsible for the actions of someone using our EANs with
> > permission [in some relevant juridisction], it is best to not have them
> > in the first place.

Henrique, can you please point me to the documentation about these
exemption letters ?  I continue to think that this is perhaps the
right route, but that your proposed letter wording is backwards.

> I'm inclined to agree… Jean-Phillipe, is there no other way you can
> ship these images? I would be very happy to write/sign some kind of
> "yeah this is really all fine" document but am wary of going doing
> some kind of official EAN registration thing that might tie us to
> .. well, who knows.

I think part of the problem here is the misunderstanding that Debian
is the manufacturer here.  We are not (except in the very limited
cases where Debian people make and sell Debian merchandise for
Debian's funds).

EANs usually refer to specific manufactured products, from a specific
manufacturer.  I don't think the EAN system is well set up for a
situation where a particular product can be manufactured independently
by multiple people.  (The products are presumably supposed to be
more-or-less identical: but of course different manufacturers might
use different DVD stock, or print with or without a picture on the
front, etc.)

So I think the "right" way for the EAN system to operate in this case,
if it is to be operated at all, is for each manufacturer to get a
different EAN for each product.  If manufacturers find registering
with the EAN system too cumbersome then surely we can look into using
our institutional resources to help.

Can someone show us the agreement we (or SPI or FFIS or some other TO)
would have to sign if we were to become an issuer of EANs ?  Perhaps
we can simply do that and have an easy way for a Debian vendor to get
an EAN from our allocation.

I'd also be interested to see what approach is taken for physical
prints of 3D models, which have certain similarities to (say) Debian
DVDs in this context.

Thanks,
Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9336

Le 25/07/2017 à 20:36, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> Chris Lamb writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
>> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>>> Run that through some legal advice, though.  If "we" (Debian, SPI, etc)
>>> get to be co-responsible for the actions of someone using our EANs with
>>> permission [in some relevant juridisction], it is best to not have them
>>> in the first place.
> 
> Henrique, can you please point me to the documentation about these
> exemption letters ?  I continue to think that this is perhaps the
> right route, but that your proposed letter wording is backwards.

Probably, hence my submission to the community.

> 
>> I'm inclined to agree… Jean-Phillipe, is there no other way you can
>> ship these images? I would be very happy to write/sign some kind of
>> "yeah this is really all fine" document but am wary of going doing
>> some kind of official EAN registration thing that might tie us to
>> .. well, who knows.
> 
> I think part of the problem here is the misunderstanding that Debian
> is the manufacturer here.  We are not (except in the very limited
> cases where Debian people make and sell Debian merchandise for
> Debian's funds).
> 
> EANs usually refer to specific manufactured products, from a specific
> manufacturer.  I don't think the EAN system is well set up for a
> situation where a particular product can be manufactured independently
> by multiple people.  (The products are presumably supposed to be
> more-or-less identical: but of course different manufacturers might
> use different DVD stock, or print with or without a picture on the
> front, etc.)

ok but this approach enables to ask a more fundamental question then. Is
Debian a trademark? If it is, Debian is the manufacturer of the Debian
ISOs, and then of the OS. So it should have EANs to enable others to
sell its OS on their support. If it is not, it means that, for example,
Hypra could say: Hypra is a trademark (there is all a pocess for it in
Amazon). From this trademark, we sell Debian products, which are from us
(manufacturer) and then we can ust freely the trademark. And sell hen
Debian-Hypra for example, eg Debian OS+DVD costomized by Hypra on their box.

But to sell on Amazon, it requires to be perfectly relevant: either
Debian is a trademark, and thus manufacturer and then needs to deal with
persons who sell it (either ith EANs, or without and letters to explain
that), or it is not, but then Debian can be used in any seller's trademark.

COncerning Hypra, of course, the second solution is excellent. But it is
not obvious, then I really am interested in your approach of the topic
which, indeed, will say how we deal with this EAN topic.

> So I think the "right" way for the EAN system to operate in this case,
> if it is to be operated at all, is for each manufacturer to get a
> different EAN for each product.  If manufacturers find registering
> with the EAN system too cumbersome then surely we can look into using
> our institutional resources to help.

The only problem of this is that payment is needed and I have to say I
am not fan of paying for EANs.

> Can someone show us the agreement we (or SPI or FFIS or some other TO)
> would have to sign if we were to become an issuer of EANs ?  Perhaps
> we can simply do that and have an easy way for a Debian vendor to get
> an EAN from our allocation.

Debian can subscribe each year, for 85 euros, to gs1.org (we need to
choose the country we want). Plus 100 euros, just once. It enables to:
- have an access to 100 or more EANs

85 euros is the anual cost for the organizations with less than 500K of
budget.

cf http://gs1.org for more information

> I'd also be interested to see what approach is taken for physical
> prints of 3D models, which have certain similarities to (say) Debian
> DVDs in this context.

I think such sellers have EAN, as their activity is mainly based on
products selling, and not only services, then it makes sense for them to
have such subscription and pay an anual cost for it.

Best regards,

> Thanks,
> Ian.
> 

-- 
Logo Hypra 	JEAN-PHILIPPE MENGUAL
DIRECTEUR TECHNIQUE ET QUALITÉ
102, rue des poissonniers, 75018, Paris
Tel : +331 84 73 06 61 <tel:+33184730661> Mob : +336 76 34 93 37
<tel:+33676349337>
jpmengual@hypra.fr <mailto:jpmengual@hypra.fr>
www.hypra.fr <http://www.hypra.fr/>
Facebook Hypra <https://www.facebook.com/hyprasoftware/> Twitter Hypra
<https://twitter.com/Hypra_> Linkedin Jean-Philippe
<https://fr.linkedin.com/in/jean-philippe-mengual-800133135>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9338

MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
> Le 25/07/2017 à 20:36, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > Henrique, can you please point me to the documentation about these
> > exemption letters ?  I continue to think that this is perhaps the
> > right route, but that your proposed letter wording is backwards.
> 
> Probably, hence my submission to the community.

Right.

> ok but this approach enables to ask a more fundamental question then. Is
> Debian a trademark?

Yes.

> If it is, Debian is the manufacturer of the Debian
> ISOs, and then of the OS.

An "ISO" is a file, not a physical object.  "The OS" is a collection
of data.  Debian is the originator of the Debian image ISOs and of the
Debian operating system.  But because ISOs, and the Debian operating
system, are not physical objects, they are not manufactured.  There is
no manufacturer.

Physical DVDs containing a copy of the Debian ISOs *are* physical
objects.  Their manufacturers are the people who arrange for, or
perform, the production of those physical objects (eg by burning the
DVD, or mass-producing them in presses, or whatever).

Debian has publicly licenced its trademark.  We give our legal
permission for the name "Debian" to be applied to such physical
objects when they are sold.

>  So it should have EANs to enable others to
> sell its OS on their support. If it is not, it means that, for example,
> Hypra could say: Hypra is a trademark (there is all a pocess for it in
> Amazon). From this trademark, we sell Debian products, which are from us
> (manufacturer) and then we can ust freely the trademark. And sell hen
> Debian-Hypra for example, eg Debian OS+DVD costomized by Hypra on their box.

I don't understand the connection between EANs and trademarks.

Does Amazon's EAN system assume that the manufacturer of goods is
always the same person as the trademark holder ?

> > So I think the "right" way for the EAN system to operate in this case,
> > if it is to be operated at all, is for each manufacturer to get a
> > different EAN for each product.  If manufacturers find registering
> > with the EAN system too cumbersome then surely we can look into using
> > our institutional resources to help.
> 
> The only problem of this is that payment is needed and I have to say I
> am not fan of paying for EANs.

Something like the EAN system probably costs money to administer.  We
pay for domain names and things too.  If the payment is too large for
a single vendor to be economic maybe we can effectively amortise it
across multiple vendors.

> > Can someone show us the agreement we (or SPI or FFIS or some other TO)
> > would have to sign if we were to become an issuer of EANs ?  Perhaps
> > we can simply do that and have an easy way for a Debian vendor to get
> > an EAN from our allocation.
> 
> Debian can subscribe each year, for 85 euros, to gs1.org (we need to
> choose the country we want). Plus 100 euros, just once. It enables to:
> - have an access to 100 or more EANs
> 
> 85 euros is the anual cost for the organizations with less than 500K of
> budget.

I think Debian's annual expenditure is less than that, but it might
depend on whether we count Debconf.  I'm sure we could afford Eur85
per year.  I don't know whether we would have more than 100
organisations who would want EANs for Debian merchandise, but if we
did I think we could consider it a success and pay more money.

> cf http://gs1.org for more information

Can you please provide deep links to the relevant pages ?

(Also, what a horrible website.  Almost unreadable for me due to
pale-grey-onwhite disease, and at least some kind of
probably-cookie-related redirect breakage.)

Ian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9324

Le 25/07/2017 à 19:49, Chris Lamb a écrit :
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> 
>> Run that through some legal advice, though.  If "we" (Debian, SPI, etc)
>> get to be co-responsible for the actions of someone using our EANs with
>> permission [in some relevant juridisction], it is best to not have them
>> in the first place.
> 
> I'm inclined to agree…  Jean-Phillipe, is there no other way you can ship
> these images? I would be very happy to write/sign some kind of "yeah this
> is really all fine" document but am wary of going doing some kind of
> official EAN registration thing that might tie us to .. well, who knows.

The alternative is my initial proposal, more simple than others indeed:
mentioning in an official letter that Debian will not get any EAN in
next two years, and that Debian does not want Hypra to sell Debian
without EAN. It does mean that anybody else cannot do it (anybody which
want to sell with or without EAN do what they want), but not Hypra (and
we agree of course), and it gives me the required base to request an EAN
exemption to Amazon.

Best regards,

> 
> Regards,
> 

-- 
Logo Hypra 	JEAN-PHILIPPE MENGUAL
DIRECTEUR TECHNIQUE ET QUALITÉ
102, rue des poissonniers, 75018, Paris
Tel : +331 84 73 06 61 <tel:+33184730661> Mob : +336 76 34 93 37
<tel:+33676349337>
jpmengual@hypra.fr <mailto:jpmengual@hypra.fr>
www.hypra.fr <http://www.hypra.fr/>
Facebook Hypra <https://www.facebook.com/hyprasoftware/> Twitter Hypra
<https://twitter.com/Hypra_> Linkedin Jean-Philippe
<https://fr.linkedin.com/in/jean-philippe-mengual-800133135>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9328

MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
> The alternative is my initial proposal, more simple than others indeed:
> mentioning in an official letter that Debian will not get any EAN in
> next two years, and that Debian does not want Hypra to sell Debian
> without EAN. It does mean that anybody else cannot do it (anybody which
> want to sell with or without EAN do what they want), but not Hypra (and
> we agree of course), and it gives me the required base to request an EAN
> exemption to Amazon.

Can you please point me to the documentation you are reading about
these letters ?

Ian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9332

MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
> Le 25/07/2017 à 23:59, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
> > Can you please point me to the documentation you are reading about
> > these letters ?
> 
> hmm I requested it, but they have no public URL for it. It is just a
> request they do per e-mail. I can produce a screenshot of mail il you want.

Can you forward me the email ?  Privately if you like.

Ian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9333

Hi,

Is it a problem if it is a French message?

Best regards


Le 27/07/2017 à 21:12, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
>> Le 25/07/2017 à 23:59, Ian Jackson a écrit :
>>> MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
>>> Can you please point me to the documentation you are reading about
>>> these letters ?
>>
>> hmm I requested it, but they have no public URL for it. It is just a
>> request they do per e-mail. I can produce a screenshot of mail il you want.
> 
> Can you forward me the email ?  Privately if you like.
> 
> Ian.
> 

-- 
Logo Hypra 	JEAN-PHILIPPE MENGUAL
DIRECTEUR TECHNIQUE ET QUALITÉ
102, rue des poissonniers, 75018, Paris
Tel : +331 84 73 06 61 <tel:+33184730661> Mob : +336 76 34 93 37
<tel:+33676349337>
jpmengual@hypra.fr <mailto:jpmengual@hypra.fr>
www.hypra.fr <http://www.hypra.fr/>
Facebook Hypra <https://www.facebook.com/hyprasoftware/> Twitter Hypra
<https://twitter.com/Hypra_> Linkedin Jean-Philippe
<https://fr.linkedin.com/in/jean-philippe-mengual-800133135>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9334

MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
> Is it a problem if it is a French message?

I'll cope somehow :-).

Ian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9337

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:55 PM, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote:

> You also need to prove a letter coming from your manufacturer that states those facts:

If Debian can help our physical media image partners to avoid EAN
bureaucracy and cost by writing a short letter, that seems like by far
the simplest and most appropriate response here.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9339

MENGUAL Jean-Philippe writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
> Here is the mail I could get in English. It sums up the situation.

Thanks.  This is very helpful.

As far as I can see:

 * Amazon seem to be concerned that products should not be sold
   on Amazon without an EAN, if the manufacturer in fact assigned
   (or will assign) an EAN.
 * Reading between the lines, Amazon also wants to avoid getting
   embroiled in trademark infringements.
 * Amazon think that manufacturers and trademark holders are
   always the same.  As a result, Amazon will probably be satisfied
   with a letter from Debian, even though Debian is not the
   manufacturer.

So I think the Debian project has the following options:

1. Write a letter like the one I propose below (NB this is
   slightly different to the original one proposed.)

2. Become an EAN issuer via something like this GSI website, and set
   up an arrangement for EAN issuance on behalf of manufacturers.

3. Become an EAN issuer and assign EANs for specific ISO files,
   with the expectation that all manufacturers of DVDs or whatever
   with the same contents, will use the same EAN.

4. Decide that Debian products should always be sold with EANs
   but that product manufacturers should acquire their own EANs
   somehow.

I think that (4) is unhelpful and I include it only for completeness.

I think (as previously discussed) that (3) is contrary to the intent
of the EAN system.  For example, one can imagine a hypothetical trade
fair where Debian DVDs from different manufacturers (maybe with
different cover art, different packaging, or different media quality)
are being sold, but via a unified checkout system.  If they have the
same EAN they aren't distinguishable by barcode.

Furthermore it would mean that a manufacturer couldn't make
hypothetical "Debian ISO - Enterprise Edition" with cover appealing to
idiots in suits, but with the same contents, and have the barcode at
the till distinguish it from the "Debian ISO - home edition" with a
colourful logo and a cheaper price.  That can't be right.

(2) is extra work.  Debian is desperately short of volunteer effort
for administrative stuff.  I don't think (2) would be a good use of
Debian's volunteer effort.

Therefore I propose that we should write a letter (1).  Draft below.
We should probably run this past a lawyer.

Ian.

                              Debian Project
			      <date>

RE DEBIAN - EUROPEAN ARTICLE NUMBER (EAN)

To Whom It May Concern

The Debian Project ("Debian") and Software In The Public Interest ,
Inc (SPI) wish to make known that:

1. Debian, through its Trusted Organisations including SPI, own and
control the trademark "Debian" in various jurisdictions.

2. Debian does not provide European Article Numbers (EANs).  Nor do
any of Debian's associated organisations do so on Debian's behalf.

3. Debian and SPI give public permission for products embodying
Debian's software and documentation to be sold, according to the
Debian Trademark Policy (which can be found at
https://www.debian.org/trademark).  That policy doese not make any
requirement about EANs.  Therefore (provided the the policy is adhered
to) we have no objection to Debian branded products being sold without
EANs.

4. Debian do not anticpate this situation changing in the next 2
years.  Specifically, we do not expect to be issuing EANs within the
next 2 years.

5. Please therefore allow vendors of Debian merchandise to trade,
notwithstanding any lack of EANs for those products.

6. This is without predjudice, of course, to our right to enforce our
trademarks against anyone found violating our trademark policy.  We
are simply saying that lack of an EAN is, in itself, completely fine.

Signed

for the Debian Project          for Software in the Public Interest




Debian Project Leader           corporate Secretary

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9340

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 02:06:54PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>
>So I think the Debian project has the following options:
>
>1. Write a letter like the one I propose below (NB this is
>   slightly different to the original one proposed.)
>
>2. Become an EAN issuer via something like this GSI website, and set
>   up an arrangement for EAN issuance on behalf of manufacturers.
>
>3. Become an EAN issuer and assign EANs for specific ISO files,
>   with the expectation that all manufacturers of DVDs or whatever
>   with the same contents, will use the same EAN.
>
>4. Decide that Debian products should always be sold with EANs
>   but that product manufacturers should acquire their own EANs
>   somehow.

...

>Therefore I propose that we should write a letter (1).  Draft below.
>We should probably run this past a lawyer.

Agreed 100%

>RE DEBIAN - EUROPEAN ARTICLE NUMBER (EAN)
>
>To Whom It May Concern
>
>The Debian Project ("Debian") and Software In The Public Interest ,
>Inc (SPI) wish to make known that:
>
>1. Debian, through its Trusted Organisations including SPI, own and
>control the trademark "Debian" in various jurisdictions.
>
>2. Debian does not provide European Article Numbers (EANs).  Nor do
>any of Debian's associated organisations do so on Debian's behalf.
>
>3. Debian and SPI give public permission for products embodying
>Debian's software and documentation to be sold, according to the
>Debian Trademark Policy (which can be found at
>https://www.debian.org/trademark).  That policy doese not make any
>requirement about EANs.  Therefore (provided the the policy is adhered
>to) we have no objection to Debian branded products being sold without
>EANs.
>
>4. Debian do not anticpate this situation changing in the next 2
>years.  Specifically, we do not expect to be issuing EANs within the
>next 2 years.
>
>5. Please therefore allow vendors of Debian merchandise to trade,
>notwithstanding any lack of EANs for those products.
>
>6. This is without predjudice, of course, to our right to enforce our
>trademarks against anyone found violating our trademark policy.  We
>are simply saying that lack of an EAN is, in itself, completely fine.
>
>Signed
>
>for the Debian Project          for Software in the Public Interest

Looks good to me, but agreed also on the lawyer front.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
"C++ ate my sanity" -- Jon Rabone

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9341

Steve McIntyre writes ("Re: Request for official help"):
> Looks good to me, but agreed also on the lawyer front.

Chris, could you please either nonexclusively delegate this issue to
me, or authorise me to contact Debian's lawers, and SPI, on Debian's
behalf, to ask them to review this letter (or some variant) ?

Jean-Phillippe, would this letter meet your needs ?

Ian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9456 — Re: Request for official help [and 1 more messages]

Hi Ian,

> I did that on the 31st of July (quoted below).  Admittedly leader@ was
> only in the CC, not the To.  I have remedied that in this mail.

For some reason, I did not receive this. Thank you for following up.
 
> > Chris, could you please either nonexclusively delegate this issue to
> > me, or authorise me to contact Debian's lawers, and SPI, on Debian's
> > behalf, to ask them to review this letter (or some variant) ?
[…]
> I'd appreciate a reply from leader@.  If Chris doesn't want to
> delegate me, then he should delegate someone else (or do the work
> himself, obviously).

I delegate to you :)


Regards,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9342

Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

> Therefore I propose that we should write a letter (1).  Draft below.

Thank you, this looks great.

> https://www.debian.org/trademark). That policy doese not make any
> requirement about EANs. Therefore (provided the the policy is adhered
> to) we have no objection to Debian branded products being sold without
> EANs.

Typo: s/provided the the policy/provided that the policy/

-- 
 \          “Speech is conveniently located midway between thought and |
  `\        action, where it often substitutes for both.” —John Andrew |
_o__)                                  Holmes, _Wisdom in Small Doses_ |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.project

csiph-web