Hi Maggie and Michelle, thank you for this update.
I see that 4 people noted similarity to the WTO logo in the first
round of voting. Another noted that while he liked the logo, it should
be modified to be significantly different in the second round... but
that did not happen. (none of the variants were selected)
We should probably have an explicit step in selection that reflects on
similarities to other logos, and the likelihood that this would be a
problem. And it would be nice to get a heads-up on the wiki when
these sorts of takedown notices are received, whether or not we choose
to fight them.
> There are also at least a few Wikivoyagers who are concerned that the
> active participants of Wikivoyage weren't properly enfranchised during the
> last logo contest.
Yes, and they were considering revisiting the logo selection anyway
now that the site has gotten underway.
Every logo contest to date has been somewhat ad-hoc; this one will be
also -- hopefully managed by the Wikivoyagers. It's a fine idea to
RfC a standard process that can be used for future contests, but that
can be done in parallel to any current logo selection (as I commented
Craig Franklin writes:
More seriously though, while I suppose the WMF might
eventually victorious in court on this sort of issue, the expense would be
enormous and the legal team's time is much better spent on things other
than fighting battles over non-core principles with international
organisations. I also suspect that the WTO has a fair bit more cash to
splash around on fancy lawyers to fight this than we do.
Yes on all counts. I was involved in a similar process at One Laptop
per Child - we did fight, since it was about a core logo, but it took
two years to resolve completely and was a real pain.
Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266