Today there was a question in the Dutch Pub about whether a certain website would be allowed to use the wikipedia logo. I don't want to go into details, not do I want an answer now, but I just wanted to check it on the official Logo Policy of the WMF.
I searched on the for me most logical place, [[m:logo]], and found, after a lot of searching and help through IRC, these urls: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo_and_trademark_policy http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_visual_identity_guidelines
The second is policy, and deals a lot on *how* to use the logo. Was nice, but not for the questions i needed an answer on. I needed to know *when* a company, foundation, community, person is allowed to use the logo. The first appeared not to be official policy. It was usefull in principle, but I couldn't direct people to there, as it wasn't official. (can't check because of db-down when it was last changed)
To my best knowledge, there is already quite some time a trademark committee (since february 2006?), of whom I thikn they could be taking care of this.
Is there a reason why this policy is waiting this long? Is the foundation currently working on this, is there already a resolution waiting maybe even? Is the Trademark committee indeed responsible and working on this issue? I don't want the proposal to be half-good, but I want the discussion going on, and get a good result as soon as it is possible. I hope this is something that hase not disappeared from your thoughts yet.
Greetz, Lodewijk
effe iets anders wrote:
Today there was a question in the Dutch Pub about whether a certain website would be allowed to use the wikipedia logo. I don't want to go into details, not do I want an answer now, but I just wanted to check it on the official Logo Policy of the WMF.
I searched on the for me most logical place, [[m:logo]], and found, after a lot of searching and help through IRC, these urls: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo_and_trademark_policy http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_visual_identity_guidelines
The second is policy, and deals a lot on *how* to use the logo. Was nice, but not for the questions i needed an answer on. I needed to know *when* a company, foundation, community, person is allowed to use the logo. The first appeared not to be official policy. It was usefull in principle, but I couldn't direct people to there, as it wasn't official. (can't check because of db-down when it was last changed)
To my best knowledge, there is already quite some time a trademark committee (since february 2006?), of whom I thikn they could be taking care of this.
Hello Effe.
They could have, but actually did not.
Is there a reason why this policy is waiting this long? Is the foundation currently working on this, is there already a resolution waiting maybe even? Is the Trademark committee indeed responsible and working on this issue? I don't want the proposal to be half-good, but I want the discussion going on, and get a good result as soon as it is possible. I hope this is something that hase not disappeared from your thoughts yet.
There is infortunately no resolution cooking as of today. We listed the issue as one of the topic to discuss at the board retreat. If you have ideas or a "draft" of concept to provide to help us proceed, it will be welcome.
Greetz, Lodewijk
Cheers ant
2006/9/27, Anthere Anthere9@yahoo.com: <snip>
There is infortunately no resolution cooking as of today. We listed the issue as one of the topic to discuss at the board retreat. If you have ideas or a "draft" of concept to provide to help us proceed, it will be welcome.
</snip>
Unfortunately indeed. I know there is a draft on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo_and_trademark_policy , and it might be a nice concept, but I think it would be best if it would be discussed by those who have studied for this, the lawyers among us, and maybe also others who are interested. I am for sure interested, but i think the legal work should be done first. In principle the idea of thecurrent draft looks OK to me (use of logo on small scale and NC is allowed, commercial needs permission from WMF or authorized agent etc), but the language might have to change (unless "stuff" is legally a clear definition ;-)) Maybe the Chief legal officer and/or brad could take a look at it?
Lodewijk
Can I just add we really need a logo policy. My personal press email address seems to have made its way onto people's lists of 'how to contact Wikipedia', and so I get these questions. I *should* be able to give them a simple answer quickly. I can't. That's bad - it wastes my time and theirs.
I hardly care what the policy is as long as there is one.
- d.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org