Talk:Trademark policy
What's new?
For easy overview of the changes proposed in the new draft, we have prepared a table comparing the new draft to the current trademark policy (2009 policy). Please note that this table doesn't necessarily reflect our current practice, which is sometimes more liberal that the language of the 2009 policy to facilitate community uses of the trademarks. But we need to update the language of the 2009 policy to match our practice and better reflect community values. YWelinder (WMF) (talk) 19:30, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Comparison table
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discussion about section 1 (What does this policy apply to?)
1 What does this policy apply to?
|
|---|
|
1.1 The "Wikimedia marks" This policy applies to all trademarks of the Wikimedia Foundation. The trademarks are both registered and unregistered trademarks, including non-stylized wordmarks and the trade dress of each Wikimedia site. See also a non-exhaustive list of our trademarks. In this policy, we refer to them as the "Wikimedia marks" or just "marks." 1.2 "Use" of the Wikimedia marks This Policy applies whenever you want to use the Wikimedia marks. Section 2 of this Policy applies to all uses of the marks. Other sections apply only to uses that do not require separate permission, uses that require a trademark license, or uses under agreements held by chapters, thematic organizations, and user groups that are recognized by the Wikimedia Foundation. If some term in your trademark license is inconsistent with this Policy, you should follow the license terms. 1.3 "We" or the "Wikimedia Foundation" This Policy regulates the use of marks held by the Wikimedia Foundation. Sometimes, this Policy simply refers to the Wikimedia Foundation as "we." 1.4 "You" This Policy applies to "you" if you want to use the Wikimedia marks and explains how you may use them. You may be a Wikimedia community member, chapter, thematic organization, or user group. You may also be an unrelated individual or organization. 1.4.1 Community members The Wikimedia community includes everyone who contributes to a Wikimedia site in furtherance of our mission. It also includes members and staff of chapters, thematic organizations, user groups, and the Wikimedia Foundation. The members of the Wikimedia community share a common mission of creating and distributing free educational content. They are the core of the Wikimedia movement. Accordingly, community members may freely use the Wikimedia Community logo. They are also free to use all Wikimedia marks on the Wikimedia sites and for community-focused events, as well as outreach work without a trademark license. Community members can also easily fill out a Wikilicense for certain other community uses. And we generally give priority to community requests for uses that require an ordinary trademark license. 1.4.2 Chapters, user groups, and thematic organizations Chapters, user groups, and thematic organizations recognized by Wikimedia Foundation are called movement organizations. They are independent from the Wikimedia Foundation and support and promote the Wikimedia sites. These groups enter into agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation, which allow them to use certain Wikimedia marks. Any use should primarily further Wikimedia's mission. To use the marks beyond the specified scope of its agreement, an organization can ask for a separate trademark license or simply comply with this policy when the use does not require a license. An organization can, of course, always select its own names, logos, and domain names. It does not have to use our marks. 1.4.3 Other organizations or individuals Wikimedia sites are so well known that authors and script writers frequently want to portray them in books and movies. Similarly, other companies may want to reuse content from Wikimedia sites in web or mobile applications. In doing so, these individuals and companies may want to display our marks in movies, books, apps, or other media. As long as users are not confused about the source of those works, this type of use can promote the Wikimedia sites and mission by expanding the reach of free knowledge and potentially recruiting new Wikimedia community members. But it's important that the Wikimedia marks are not misleadingly used to market others' products because that will confuse Wikimedia users. We therefore have to be careful when licensing the marks for these purposes. For example, when licensing the marks to an organization that has its own logo, we need to make sure that it doesn't display any Wikimedia mark more prominently than its own logo or name. It's helpful to always have a proper separation between the organization's name and logo and any Wikimedia mark. Users should clearly see that the organization's products or services are provided by that other organization rather than the Wikimedia Foundation. And such use is never allowed without a trademark license. 1.5 "Mission" The Wikimedia marks should only used for activities that promote our mission, which is to "empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally." |
Discussion:
Discussion about section 2 (How to use the Wikimedia marks)
2 How to use the Wikimedia marks
|
|---|
|
<!--- This text is used for the discussion around the trademark policy. Please only make changes here that have met with consensus and been approved by the legal team. ---> Section 2 How to use the Wikimedia marks Please follow the Visual Identity Guidelines whenever you use the marks whether with or without a trademark license. Whenever you use the Wikimedia marks, note the following: 2.1 Proper form You may use the wordmarks as a proper name (e.g. "Wikidata is great") or as an adjective (e.g. "the Wikimedia sites are awesome"). This includes any of the official translations and transliterations of the Wikimedia marks. On the Wikimedia sites, you can use the marks in any form. You can create remixes of the wordmarks and logos, abbreviate them, and add to them. Outside the Wikimedia sites, you may only use Wikimedia wordmarks in their full form and properly capitalized (e.g. "Wikibooks"). The logos should also not be modified without separate permission from the Wikimedia Foundation. We need to make sure that the logos remain distinctive from other marks. 2.2 Notice or trademark symbol When reasonable, please include this notice when you use a mark outside of the Wikimedia sites: "[Wordmark / name of logo as listed here] is a trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation and is used with the permission of the Wikimedia Foundation. We are not endorsed by or affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation." The notice should appear near the first use of a Wikimedia mark. One notice is enough if you display multiple marks, provided the notice refers to all of them. You don't need to display this notice if you are using the Community logo under Section 3.4. If the mark will primarily appear on a mobile screen or another medium with limited visual space, you may instead use a trademark symbol (™) with the mark to show that it is a Wikimedia trademark. For size and location of the trademark symbol, please see the Visual Identity Guidelines. When you use a symbol due to limited space and there are additional pages to your material, please include the notice in the text of a prominent page (e.g. most mobile apps have an "about us" section and may display terms during installation). Regardless of whether you use a notice or a trademark symbol to identify your use of Wikimedia marks, make sure that your use does not suggest endorsement by or affiliation with the Wikimedia Foundation. |
Discussion:
Discussion about section 3 (When you may use the Wikimedia marks without asking us)
3 When you may use the Wikimedia marks without asking us
|
|---|
|
3.1 Use of trademarks on the Wikimedia sites You may use and remix the Wikimedia marks on the Wikimedia sites as you please. 3.2 Community-focused events You may use the trademarks for events that promote our mission and are intended to be predominantly attended by Wikimedia community members. These are events like hackathons, editor meetups, photographer excursions, and WikiCons. For example, you can put the Wikipedia puzzle globe logo on banners and posters at an edit-a-thon you've organized. GLAM initiatives and photo contests require a Wikilicense under Section 4.1. This provision also does not allow you to use the marks for fundraising. 3.3 Outreach and recruiting new contributors You may use the marks consistent with our mission to educate people about the Wikimedia sites and to recruit new contributors, as long as you make it clear that you do not work for the Wikimedia Foundation. You can create educational material or banners to decorate a public fair stand or to publicize an edit-a-thon. But, please don't sell any of them. This provision does not allow you to use the marks for fundraising. 3.4 Community logo use The Wikimedia Community logo can be used freely. But you may not file trademark applications incorporating the logo. The Wikimedia community wants to ensure that the logo remains available for all to use. 3.5 Discussing something other than Wikimedia sites (fair use) Wordmarks can sometimes have a primary meaning, in addition to representing a brand (like the words "apple" or "facebook"). Our wordmarks were not real words before our projects were created. But we will interpret fair use broadly to include the use of our wordmarks when you really mean to talk about something other than the Wikimedia sites. 3.6 Refer to Wikimedia sites (nominative use) You can use the non-stylized wordmarks (e.g. "Wikipedia") to describe: A Wikimedia site or another aspect of the Wikimedia movement in a text (e.g. "I love reading about coal balls on Wikipedia"). A derivative work of Wikimedia content in a way that is not misleading (e.g. "the encyclopedic content on this site is derived from Wikipedia"). You may also use all Wikimedia marks on your own website as a hyperlink to the Wikimedia sites. The use of logos in hyperlinks should follow the Visual Identity Guidelines (for example, the marks may be resized, but not modified in any other way). Here are some other specific cases of nominative use: 3.6.1 News reporting You may use the Wikimedia marks to make truthful statements about the Wikimedia sites in news reports and commentary. 3.6.2 Personal blogs and social media You can use the Wikimedia marks to make truthful statements about the Wikimedia sites in personal blogs and social media. But please don't do it to imply endorsement by or affiliation to the Wikimedia Foundation. To avoid confusion, don't use the Wikimedia logos in the background, as your profile image, or in the header of your blog. You should also not use the marks in the name of your blog or in your social media username. This section is not meant to restrict your use of the Community logo under Section 3.4. 3.6.3 Artistic, scientific, literary, political, and other non-commercial uses You can use the Wikimedia marks to discuss the Wikimedia sites in artistic, scientific, literary, and political work. But please send us a request if you want to place a Wikimedia mark on the cover of your book, display a Wikimedia mark in a movie, or organize an event or presentation that could be interpreted to be endorsed by the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please see Section 4. You may also use the marks in satire or jokes. To avoid confusing users that your work is affiliated with the Wikimedia sites, it may be helpful to mark your work as "satire" or "parody." 3.7 Make your own branded stuff You may create things with the marks for your own use. These can be t-shirts, caps, desktop wallpapers, lanyards and even cakes! But please don't sell them, and make sure that your design follows the Visual Identity Guidelines. If you want to sell your branded stuff, you can request a license under Section 4.6. |
Discussion:
Discussion about section 4 (Special uses that require permission)
4 Special uses that require permission
|
|---|
|
All uses that are not allowed under Section 3 of this policy require a trademark license. This section discusses only the most common uses that require a license. When you use our marks under a trademark license, you need to comply with its terms as well as with this trademark policy. If some term in your license is inconsistent with this policy, you should follow the license terms. Movement organizations will only need a separate license when the use is not already authorized by their organizational agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation or this policy. 4.1 Wikilicense for special community uses A Wikilicense is a quick trademark license for common community uses, like Wiki Loves Monuments and GLAM-Wiki initiatives. It is available on Meta-Wiki. You can start using the marks as stated in the Wikilicense as soon as you email a filled-in Wikilicense to trademarks@wikimedia.org. There is no need to wait for approval. 4.1.1 Photo contests Photo contests allow people to submit freely licensed original photographs to Wikimedia Commons to compete for the best image. You can get a quick Wikilicense for flyers, posters, slide presentations, websites, and social media for a photo contest. If you are a movement organization, you may already have an agreement that covers photo contests. 4.1.2 GLAM-Wiki initiatives You may use the marks in a collaboration with someone outside of the Wikimedia movement with a quick Wikilicense. This license applies to collaborations with parks, museums, libraries, and other cultural institutions to share their information with the world through the Wikimedia sites. If you are a movement organization, you may already have an agreement that covers photo contests. Some GLAM initiatives include Wikipedians in Residence, which are Wikipedia contributors who work with a specific GLAM to develop the organization's relationship with Wikipedia. Please use a quick Wikilicense in order to represent yourself as a Wikipedian in Residence on online professional profiles, your personal blog, and on social media, as long as your work is consistent with the mission. 4.2 Domain names You need permission to register or use a domain name that contains a Wikimedia mark in it. Please don't register a domain that looks or sounds similar to a Wikimedia mark or includes a misspelled Wikimedia mark as that can confuse Wikimedia users. 4.3 Events and conferences You need a trademark license if you plan to host a public event or a conference that uses a Wikimedia mark. You should include the following information when requesting a license to use our marks in an event. What is the proposed title of the event? Who is hosting, sponsoring, or coordinating the event? Include contact information (and Wikimedia username if relevant) for the person organizing the event. Is the event organized for community members? What is the topic of the event? The location, date, and duration of the event. Include handouts, examples, mockups, or other descriptions of the proposed use. When you get a trademark license, it will only apply to the specific event in your request. You will need to apply for a new license if you want to host another event. 4.4 Publications You need a trademark license if you want to use a Wikimedia mark in a publication in a way that is not fair or nominative use under U.S. trademark law or other applicable foreign laws. You should include the following information when requesting a license to use our marks in a publication. What is the proposed title of the publication? Contact information (and Wikimedia username if relevant) for the applicant. Who is the author, editor, and publisher of the publication? For fiction, what is the storyline? How do you want to use and discuss the mark? Include screenshots of the pages in your publication that includes or discusses the mark. (For a book, where in the book will the mark appear?) If your publication will display a screenshot of a Wikimedia site, please include that as well. Will the publication be in hard copy, an e-book, or some other type of medium? What is the print run and distribution area for the publication? How many editions will it have? When you get a trademark license, it will only apply to the specific publication in your request. You will need to apply for a new license if you want to make another publication. 4.5 Movies & TV shows You need a trademark license if you want to use the Wikipedia logo in a movie, TV show episode, or online production. You should include the following information when requesting a license to use our marks in a movie or TV show. What is the proposed title of the movie or TV show? Contact information (and Wikimedia username if relevant) for the applicant. The names of the screenwriter, director, producer, distributor, actors, and any interviewees (for documentaries). How will the Wikimedia mark be displayed or discussed? Include a screenshot of any Wikimedia site that you want to show. Include a script and any footage that has already been created. Unless discussed in the script, specify the location of the film and whether it will advertise a product in conjunction with using the Wikimedia marks. Where, when, and how will the movie be distributed? How will it be advertised? Do you intend to display the Wikimedia marks on the advertisement? When you get a trademark license, it will only apply to the specific film, TV show episode, or online production in your request. You will need to apply for a new license if you want to shoot another film or TV show episode. 4.6 Commercial merchandise You may also make merchandise with the Wikimedia trademarks for commercial use, if: You get a trademark license from the Wikimedia Foundation; You follow our Visual Identity Guidelines; and You truthfully advertise to customers how much of the selling price, if any, will be donated to Wikimedia sites. |
Discussion:
Discussion about section 5 (Prohibited uses)
5 Prohibited uses
|
|---|
|
5.1. Misleading mirrors and mimicking sites Please don't create a website that mimics the ‘look and feel' of a Wikimedia site. This especially applies to imitated Wikipedia articles. If you have a good reason to create a mimicking site, please contact us at trademarks@wikimedia.org. You don't need to contact us if you just want to use the MediaWiki software to create a wiki or if your mimicking site is clearly a parody. If you create a mirror, make sure to comply with the relevant licenses for the content. Avoid copying links to Wikimedia policies and contact details. Please don't use the Wikimedia marks in a mirror of a Wikimedia site. 5.2 Linking to non-Wikimedia sites You may use Wikimedia marks to link to Wikimedia sites only. Please refer to Links to Wikimedia sites if you want to link to a Wikimedia site from your website. 5.3 Misrepresentation When you use a Wikimedia mark, do not create the impression that your use is in any way endorsed, or sponsored by, or part of the Wikimedia Foundation. This section also applies when you are granted a license to use a mark that doesn't permit you to suggest such an endorsement. |
Discussion:
Section 5 prohibitions trump everything else
Section 5 prohibits certain uses of the marks, while sections 3 and 4 allow certain uses. For greater practical and legal certainty it would be sensible to make it clear that all of the s3 and s4 permissions are subject to the restrictions of s5. That's clearly intended but does not appear to be explicitly stated. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:29, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
- That's a good point. I'll clarify this in Sections 3 and 4. Thanks, YWelinder (WMF) (talk) 07:57, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
I believe that this discussion has concluded and, unless you remove this template, will be archiving this topic soon. If you disagree, please edit this section and remove {{ArchivingSoon}}. Anna Koval (WMF) (talk) 20:24, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Discussion about section 6 (Trademark Abuse)
6 Trademark Abuse
|
|---|
|
6.1 Reporting misuse Fighting trademark misuse is very important. We put a lot of effort into going after cases of trademark infringement because we want to protect the valuable trademark rights the community has created. If you see a mark being used in any way that could be infringing, please tell us! Just send an email to legal-tm-vio@wikimedia.org or report it here. We really appreciate your help! 6.2 Revoking permission for misuses We may revoke the right to use the Wikimedia marks under this policy at any time by providing notice in any manner if we determine that a trademark use is inconsistent with our mission or could harm community members, movement organizations, or the Wikimedia Foundation. |
Discussion:
Discussion about section 7 (Revision and Translation of the trademark policy)
7 Revision and Translation of the trademark policy
|
|---|
|
7.1 This trademark policy can be revised as follows: We will propose major changes to the community in three languages selected by us. We will give notice of the proposed revision on the Wikimedia sites and in an email to WikimediaAnnounce-L or a similar mailing list. The community can then comment for at least 30 days. For minor changes or changes required by law, when possible we will provide three days' notice to WikimediaAnnounce-L or a similar mailing list. Minor changes include language fixes, administrative changes, or corrections of inaccurate statements. This section does not apply to the user-friendly summary, the FAQs, the purpose statement for the trademark policy, the trademark request form, and the violation reporting form. They are not part of this trademark policy and can always be revised without notice. 7.2 Translation of the trademark policy If there is any differences in meaning between the original English version of this trademark policy and a translation, you should follow the original English version. 7.3 Questions Please don't hesitate to contact us at trademarks@wikimedia.org if you are not sure whether your use is in compliance with this policy or local trademark laws. |
Discussion:
Discussion about the Quick License (formally "Wikilicense")
Discussion:
Discussion about the FAQ
Discussion:
Discussion about the trademark "request a license" form
Discussion:
Discussion about the violation reporting form
Other discussion
Community logo still mentioned in the policy
I've been assured by @James Alexander that, because the new policy will not cover the community logo, every mention of it will be removed before the draft is finalized. Yet, it hasn't been done to this day, and the consultation period appears to have finished (blog announcement). @YWelinder (WMF), AKoval (WMF), Philippe (WMF), LVilla (WMF), and Slaporte (WMF): can you please remove almost all mentions of the community logo from the policy before it is presented for Board of Trustees approval? I'm especially concerned about the parts which say that the new policy allows free use of that logo, because it doesn't.[1] I'm also pinging @Sj, Phoebe, and Raystorm: so that they're aware of this issue and can react before they vote on approving the new draft. odder (talk) 11:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Hey odder, I'm going to sleep (and we have a holiday tomorrow) so I am unlikely to respond right away but I'm a bit confused so if you could expand that may help the others answer in case they are as well. The new policy, as I read it, only mentions the Community Logo in a couple places to specifically call out that that it is available for free use ( "This logo can be used freely" , "The Wikimedia Community logo can be used freely." etc) with the only possible restriction being that it says that you shouldn't file a trademark registration for the logo.. which seems to make sense. I imagine that if someone attempted to reserve the mark for their own use (through a TM registration) and therefore taking it away from the community they would want us to defend it, I know I certainly would. I would also want the logo mentioned as it is (in a 'this is free to use' way) rather then not mentioned at all because if it is going to be free to use I think we have a bit of an obligation to make sure people know that instead of hiding it. It's obviously always possible I missed something so if there is a piece that looks different I'd appreciate some expansion. Jalexander--WMF 12:24, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Hi James, thanks for the fast response. I don't know whether the Foundation is planning to protect the community logo from malicious takeovers; I think someone already asked this question and did not receive an answer. I would certainly hope and expect the Foundation to act in community's interest should such a situation happen in the future, and would warmly welcome a statement from the legal team saying so.
- As far as this new draft and its summary are considered, they mentioned that the community logo could be freely used as an effect of this new policy, which isn't true, since the logo is not covered by it. I personally don't think the community logo should be mentioned at all in this policy, just like you don't mention the Wiki Loves Monuments logo, the WALRUS logo, or other logos created by the community. To show what I meant, and in a wiki spirit, I removed some mentions of the logo from the policy and the summary (1, 2, 3); please do have a look at those edits. odder (talk) 20:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Wait, you wanted trademark protections removed from the community logo, but now you hope that the legal department will protect it from malicious takeovers? You can't have it both ways. You advocated for opening up the logo, now it's open. Don't go asking for legal interventions now... Anyway, I think you're being unhelpful by removing mentions of it. Do you want people to use the community logo or not? If so, then they have to learn about it somehow. It seems reasonable to assume people will learn about it via the trademark policy. Therefore, it seems like it would be in the best interest of anyone who actually wants the community logo to be used to leave mentions in there. Your over-interpreting of language is getting in the way of the actual goal here, I think. But, hey, whatever. -- phoebe | talk 22:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- I absolutely can have it both ways, @Phoebe. If the Wikimedia Foundation aims to have the best interest of the community at heart, I think it is only reasonable that they would protect the logo against malicious takeovers should such situation arise. Of course, we at the community are perfectly capable of acting on our own, and the Foundation is not required for us to be able to effectively protect the logo. Reclaim the Logo has proven this beautifully, and if the Foundation does not wish to help the community in this case, I think they should make their stance known — it will definitely make it easier for us and our donors to decide whether it's best to donate money to the WMF or maybe choose a local chapter that is actually supporting the community that creates our projects.
- Wait, you wanted trademark protections removed from the community logo, but now you hope that the legal department will protect it from malicious takeovers? You can't have it both ways. You advocated for opening up the logo, now it's open. Don't go asking for legal interventions now... Anyway, I think you're being unhelpful by removing mentions of it. Do you want people to use the community logo or not? If so, then they have to learn about it somehow. It seems reasonable to assume people will learn about it via the trademark policy. Therefore, it seems like it would be in the best interest of anyone who actually wants the community logo to be used to leave mentions in there. Your over-interpreting of language is getting in the way of the actual goal here, I think. But, hey, whatever. -- phoebe | talk 22:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- As far as this new draft and its summary are considered, they mentioned that the community logo could be freely used as an effect of this new policy, which isn't true, since the logo is not covered by it. I personally don't think the community logo should be mentioned at all in this policy, just like you don't mention the Wiki Loves Monuments logo, the WALRUS logo, or other logos created by the community. To show what I meant, and in a wiki spirit, I removed some mentions of the logo from the policy and the summary (1, 2, 3); please do have a look at those edits. odder (talk) 20:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- I don't think I'm being unhelpful by removing mentions of the logo from the policy. That's just your opinion, and while you are entitled to it, please do notice that I did not remove all mentions of the community logo from the policy (such as section 3.4), but only those that were either misleading or simply factually incorrect. Also, please take into consideration that this logo isn't covered by the policy, so it doesn't make any sense from a legalese perspective to mention it; as I said before, the draft doesn't mention the logos of Wiki Loves Monuments, WALRUS, etc. But hey, whatever. odder (talk) 22:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- No worries James, this should make it clear: [2]. And please don't thank me, the past taught me I'd later have to pay you a high price for the honour. --Nemo 21:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Some recent edits by Philippe seem to imply that something is not clear yet about this matter. Everyone feel free to comment on talk. --Nemo 09:50, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- What the fuck is going on ? If the community logo is not trademarked by the Foundation, why should the trademark policy of the Foundation speak about it ? Or is there any hidden agenda behind this ? I've got to admit that I'm quite pissed at how all this was done... Pleclown (talk) 12:25, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- @Pleclown: be polite, please. @Nemo: As a board member I don't appreciate last minute editing of the draft; LCA closed the consultation in time for them to submit it to the board, on our calendar, before our meeting; given that, I would like a stable and legal-team approved version to read this week. Everyone had many months to read and consult, and I accept that it will never be perfect; you should too. -- phoebe | talk 22:26, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Phoebe, thanks for stepping in. I've however no idea what you're talking about, the decision on the community logo (as regards the WMF staff) was taken over 40 days ago, way before the closure of this consultation. Its presence here was either a typo, or some misunderstaing, or a precedence issue on whether the staff should first wait for the board to confirm that they don't want WMF to register the community logo, or instead they can already proceed that way (including in this draft). As you've not yet commented on the issue, perhaps you may want to tell us if you/the board thinks that it takes an amendment to past board resolutions for the community logo not to be registered by WMF, and if yes whether and when the board will discuss the matter, and if yes if it will be decided together with this policy, and if yes where it can be written if not in the policy itself. --Nemo 22:43, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, the matter was brought to us; I don't know if anything's been published yet, I'll have to look. Anyway, no one is arguing with the decision to withdraw trademark registration; that's not in dispute, and mentioning the community logo in the trademark policy doesn't imply that it is. As I noted above, I think mentioning the community logo as one option that is always open to people, in a description in the trademark policy of what people can do with the trademarks and what they can't, is perfectly reasonable. I don't think it's appropriate to keep making substantial edits at this late date, but mostly I certainly don't think it's worth edit warring over. -- phoebe | talk 00:04, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Phoebe, then we'll wait for info on how you plan to proceed on the matter. I agree that some parts of the page may name the community logo: see also my edit linked above and the comment below, 00:33, 22 January 2014. --Nemo 10:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- I see a resolution on the topic is included in Agenda January 31st-February 1st 2014 Board Meeting. I've not reviewed the latest updates to this page and talk but I'm looking forward to the outcome. --Nemo 17:49, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Phoebe, then we'll wait for info on how you plan to proceed on the matter. I agree that some parts of the page may name the community logo: see also my edit linked above and the comment below, 00:33, 22 January 2014. --Nemo 10:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, the matter was brought to us; I don't know if anything's been published yet, I'll have to look. Anyway, no one is arguing with the decision to withdraw trademark registration; that's not in dispute, and mentioning the community logo in the trademark policy doesn't imply that it is. As I noted above, I think mentioning the community logo as one option that is always open to people, in a description in the trademark policy of what people can do with the trademarks and what they can't, is perfectly reasonable. I don't think it's appropriate to keep making substantial edits at this late date, but mostly I certainly don't think it's worth edit warring over. -- phoebe | talk 00:04, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- No, @Phoebe. I've been personally assured by @James Alexander that the legal team were working on re-writing the draft after the closure of the request for consultation that they started following our trademark opposition. Perhaps unwisely, I trusted James' assurance and did not look at this draft since — so you can imagine my surprise at seeing the logo still mentioned in it (for instance, "To further make it easier for community members to use the marks, this policy introduces some creative trademark solutions. For example, community members may freely use the Wikimedia Community logo", is just blatantly false), which, of course, resulted in my starting this discussion. odder (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Hey odder, it appears there may be some misunderstanding about my response to you on that. You asked me if we were going to remove all references to the Community Logo now that it wasn't going to be trademarked. You're right that I said I expected significant changes to be made to the document (and then talked about how it might take a bit of time given everything) but I also said that I expected the lawyers to want "something explicit in there about how 'this logo belongs to the community' too, so that it's obvious to others as well." That seems to be what they've done here. My comment about expecting final changes to take time "as people try to clarify etc" was meant to imply time for anyone within the community who didn't think the changes were clear enough to say so; I was hoping you'd continue to participate in that discussion in case anything was unclear. Jalexander--WMF 00:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- @Jalexander: And I'm cool with that; as I wrote above in response to Phoebe, I'm not removing every mention of the logo from the policy (even though I don't think it should be there), only the parts that were false (see above) or misleading (such as links to a Commons category for community logo derivatives when talking about remixes of trademarked logos). odder (talk) 00:33, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- And yet, @Philippe just revered my edit, bringing those links back. Let me repeat what I already said: linking to a category with files derived from the community logo—which isn't covered by this policy–while talking about remixing Wikimedia trademarks is totally misleading. (This is visible in Translations:Trademark policy/40/en and Translations:Trademark policy/50/en.) Please, please fix it. Thank you. odder (talk) 18:42, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- @Jalexander: And I'm cool with that; as I wrote above in response to Phoebe, I'm not removing every mention of the logo from the policy (even though I don't think it should be there), only the parts that were false (see above) or misleading (such as links to a Commons category for community logo derivatives when talking about remixes of trademarked logos). odder (talk) 00:33, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Hey odder, it appears there may be some misunderstanding about my response to you on that. You asked me if we were going to remove all references to the Community Logo now that it wasn't going to be trademarked. You're right that I said I expected significant changes to be made to the document (and then talked about how it might take a bit of time given everything) but I also said that I expected the lawyers to want "something explicit in there about how 'this logo belongs to the community' too, so that it's obvious to others as well." That seems to be what they've done here. My comment about expecting final changes to take time "as people try to clarify etc" was meant to imply time for anyone within the community who didn't think the changes were clear enough to say so; I was hoping you'd continue to participate in that discussion in case anything was unclear. Jalexander--WMF 00:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Phoebe, thanks for stepping in. I've however no idea what you're talking about, the decision on the community logo (as regards the WMF staff) was taken over 40 days ago, way before the closure of this consultation. Its presence here was either a typo, or some misunderstaing, or a precedence issue on whether the staff should first wait for the board to confirm that they don't want WMF to register the community logo, or instead they can already proceed that way (including in this draft). As you've not yet commented on the issue, perhaps you may want to tell us if you/the board thinks that it takes an amendment to past board resolutions for the community logo not to be registered by WMF, and if yes whether and when the board will discuss the matter, and if yes if it will be decided together with this policy, and if yes where it can be written if not in the policy itself. --Nemo 22:43, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- @Pleclown: be polite, please. @Nemo: As a board member I don't appreciate last minute editing of the draft; LCA closed the consultation in time for them to submit it to the board, on our calendar, before our meeting; given that, I would like a stable and legal-team approved version to read this week. Everyone had many months to read and consult, and I accept that it will never be perfect; you should too. -- phoebe | talk 22:26, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I have taken another look at this, and I believe it is appropriate for the policy to mention the free use of the community logo, which we have done, for example, in Section 3.4. That logo is the symbol that is on all the Meta-Wiki pages hosted by WMF, so we should explain that the community logo is treated differently from the other Wikimedia marks; as the community consultation showed on the issue, there were differing and strong views on the registration of the mark, so a clear statement in the trademark statement is appropriate to ensure we all move forward on the same page; and, finally, a clear statement will help ensure against any inadvertent registration in the future (after this debate is long forgotten). That said, I will remove the sentence that refers to the community logo in line 73 "(It allows community members to use the Wikimedia marks without a trademark license for Wikimedia community-focused events and outreach work.") since the context of that sentence is subject to different interpretations. We will also post the Wikimedia logo, in lieu of the community logo, in the summary section of the new trademark policy to avoid too much emphasis on the community logo. Geoffbrigham (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Mention the free use, why not. Linking to remixes of the community logo when speaking about remixes of trademarked logos of the Foundation, no. There is plenty others remixed Foundation trademarked logos on Commons to chose from. Pleclown (talk) 16:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Pleclown! We have replaced the links. YWelinder (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, @YWelinder (WMF), this change is greatly appreciated. odder (talk) 12:26, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Pleclown! We have replaced the links. YWelinder (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
I believe that this discussion has concluded and, unless you remove this template, will be archiving this topic soon. If you disagree, please edit this section and remove {{ArchivingSoon}}. Anna Koval (WMF) (talk) 20:57, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Board review edits
I have done a final review of the trademark policy as we prepare its presentation to the Board for its January 31st meeting. Upon further reflection, to avoid confusion by community members and others, I want to underscore in the policy what we already say in the FAQ (FAQ 3.4) that Wikimedia marks should be used to represent only the projects for which they stand. Therefore, in Section 5.3 of the trademark policy, I am adding the following sentence: "When you use a Wikimedia mark under this policy, please use it to represent only the project for which it stands." Thanks. Geoffbrigham (talk) 19:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
- We have also made a few editorial changes to the Trademark policy and the FAQ. Thanks, YWelinder (WMF) (talk) 00:54, 28 January 2014 (UTC)