[Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo
peter.southwood at telkomsa.net
Sun Jun 2 05:43:46 UTC 2013
So we stand up to small bullies, by not to big ones.
Nice to know where the line is drawn when it comes to principles.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Franklin" <cfranklin at halonetwork.net>
To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo
> On 2 June 2013 00:22, MZMcBride <z at mzmcbride.com> wrote:
>> Craig Franklin wrote:
>> >I'm sure that the legal team has done their homework on this and would
>> >have made this recommendation unless they felt that the WTO had a
>> >argument. Asking the Foundation to play chicken with the lawyers of a
>> >major international organisation over a trademark claim on a relatively
>> >new and easily replaced logo of ours does not offer a very good
>> >risk/reward ratio in my view.
>> You mean "has done their homework on this this time," right? The General
>> Counsel position is one of the oldest in the Wikimedia Foundation and the
>> Legal and Community Advocacy team certainly existed before the previous
>> Wikivoyage logo contest. If this were an issue, you'd think someone
>> would've said something six months ago. And, of course, there's no
>> shortage of trademark, patent, or copyright trolls in the world. I've
>> both logos and while they're obviously similar, I'm sure there are a
>> number of lawyers who could make a number of arguments as to why there's
>> no real issue here. Anyone can send a cease and desist letter, right?
> The WMF Legal team are good, but they're not *that* good. I'm sure if
> Geoff and the gang were capable of foretelling the future to see if they'd
> get issued with a cease-and-desist, they'd be spending their lottery
> winnings in the Caribbean rather than dealing with trademark issues.
> There are also at least a few Wikivoyagers who are concerned that the
>> active participants of Wikivoyage weren't properly enfranchised during
>> last logo contest. That is, there's a concern that the people most
>> involved with Wikivoyage will get drowned out by the much larger
>> community in any contest of this nature.
> Obviously this is a valid concern, but that's best dealt with by making
> sure that the best process is in place for the logo competition, not by
> complaining about something that, lets face it, is not going to change.
> Obviously, for those that were unhappy with the last logo process, this is
> an opportunity to have an improved contest this time around.
>> I would think some of these issues would be of concern to you. This isn't
>> about asking anyone to play chicken. It's about ensuring that communities
>> are free to choose their own identity.
> Well, obviously I'd be happy for them to pick whatever identity, so long
> it's not infringing on a trademark. In other words, they can't have the
> Golden Arches or Mickey Mouse ears! :-).
> More seriously though, while I suppose the WMF might conceivably be
> 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. It's not a nice
> situation to be in obviously, but it's better than the Foundation having
> waste its money fighting this in court.
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
More information about the Wikimedia-l