Wow, thanks for the pointer Tomasz.
* Someone creates a community logo, intending for it not to be owned
by the WMF, but without telling anyone the WMF declares ownership.
* Then they cheekily offer to allow you to use the logo, as long as
you get their permission
* They then suggest they want the community to create a community logo
that can be used without permission, and ask for community guidance as
to whether the marks should be owned or restricted by the WMF
But of course, no one ever questioned whether the logos were
"community logos" before the WMF trademarked them, and all the
guidance they could want is in the history of the community logo
discussions.
Meanwhile, three different members of the legal team took the time to
explain that "copyright and trademark are different" despite no one
having apparently been confused on that point.
Sometimes, it's amazing how tone deaf corporate legal offices can be.
There was a time when the WMF was an exception.