Re: Logo trademark license vs. copyright license
Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:19:19 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> > The mere fact that I use the name and logo of the project can't
> > be reason enough to assume affiliation or association.
>
> Mmmh, the Debian Official Use Logo implies endorsement by the Debian
> Project.
Yes, that's the goodwill you have built up with that logo. You
created that because of the way you used the logo. And that is
also the weakness of trademarks: if you allow people to do too
much with them, you lose your goodwill, and then it's all over.
> Hence, if someone places the Official Use Logo on his/her products and
> sells them, he/she is asserting that those products are endorsed by the
> Debian Project: if they are not actually endorsed, he/she is misusing
> the logo.
>
> Or not?
I can't tell from the logo that it implies endorsement by the
Debian Project. So how do I assert endorsement when I put that
logo on, say, my car repair shop?
> To use them as long as there's no confusion going on.
> If a logo means endorsement, you cannot use it on non endorsed products.
If the license works like this, I cannot take the official logo
and use it to promote my car repair business.
I thought the whole idea was that I *could* put the Official Use
logo on anything, as long as I didn't falsely pretend my product
was endorsed. My car repair business has nothing to do with
the Debian Project, no one will be confused about the origin of
my service and I do not pretend I am an affiliate of Debian.
If you do want to permit this, there won't be much difference
between the Official and the Open logo anymore.
If you don't want to permit this, then maybe this open trademark
license is not the right choice. You need some pretty tough
usage restrictions if you want to control the official use logo
to that extent.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Reply to: