Disclaimer: No caffeine in my bloodstream yet. On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 4:53 AM, Alexander von Gluck <kallisti5@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The problem is they all say something different. I'm guessing the sgi.com > pdf to be correct (the one eddy quoted), and it would require we notate > OpenGL a registered trademark of SGI. (which we *may* do in the about pane, > not sure) I supsect there are different uses of the logo out there - for example, a game or application that is written to use OpenGL may use the logo in a less restrictive way than say an OpenGL implementation itself. The latter probably requires some conformance testing to ensure it is accurate to the standard before it can use the logo, while the former maybe just uses the standard API. > However, every lawyer I've ever listened to always says you have to > respect the most restrictive trademark if no distinction is made about > the correct/current one by the owning entity. (or you have written > confirmation from the owning entity) We could, of course, contact SGI/Khronos to get clarification. But honestly, I have to believe Mesa has already attempted this. Are there any statements anywhere on the Mesa site about their OpenGL compliance and attempts to obtain a license for the logo usage? - Urias