[Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
39 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Maggie Dennis
Hello, all.

I've just posted an announcement by legal on Meta (
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikivoyage/Logo_announcement) about the
Wikivoyage logo - unfortunately, we are going to have to choose a new one.
To save you all from having to click on the link, I'll reproduce the
announcement at the bottom of my email.

Sometime in the next couple of weeks, we will need to launch a contest for
the new Wikivoyage logo, but first I'm hoping to get feedback and
assistance in making the best process for that possible. We had been
considering ways to optimize logo selection by the community, with the idea
that we would have plenty of time to talk about the process before needing
it. Unfortunately, we now need something quite quickly. Accordingly, I'd be
really grateful for feedback on the process, which has been posted here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo_contest_procedure

You can read a little more about it here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Logo_contest_procedure

I hope you will share your questions, comments and suggestions there.

Thanks.

Maggie

****

As many of you know, the community held a contest to design and decide upon
the new logo that would come to represent Wikivoyage, the latest open and
collaborative project to be hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. After
review of quite a few fantastic entries and much debate, the logo below was
decided upon by community consensus: [omitted; see linked discussion]

Unfortunately, both the Foundation and several members of the community
discovered that the eventually chosen logo bore a striking resemblance to
the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) logo: [omitted; see linked discussion]

At that time, the Foundation reviewed the two logos and believed that,
while some risk existed, there were significant enough differences between
the designs and the markets the two organizations occupied for both logos
to co-exist.

Since then, the Foundation has received a cease-and-desist letter from the
WTO, requesting that we change the logo. While we wish that the WTO agreed
with our assessment that the two logos contain substantial differences and
could co-exist, we understand their concern. We still believe that there
are some significant differences between the Wikivoyage logo and the WTO,
however, such arguments are not guaranteed to win if we were to legally
oppose this request because there are also some substantial similarities.
With this in mind, as well as the fact that the Wikivoyage logo is still
relatively new and has not had a chance to build significant brand
recognition yet, we believe the better solution is to hold a new community
contest for a new logo.

We believe that the community is the best body to decide what logo should
represent their hard work and hope that interested community members will
take this opportunity to once again showcase their creativity and talent by
submitting designs. The WTO has been very understanding of the Wikimedia
movement’s values and need for community consensus and has agreed to grant
us ample time to develop a new logo through community processes. (Please
see the proposed Logo contest
procedure<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo_contest_procedure>.)
That said, we hope to begin the process of community consultation and input
in the next few days so that the new logo can be in place by the end of
July. With that, we look forward to seeing new designs!


Michelle Paulson <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Mpaulson_(WMF)>
Legal and Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation



--
Maggie Dennis
Senior Community Advocate
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

MZMcBride-2
Michelle Paulson wrote:

>Since then, the Foundation has received a cease-and-desist letter from the
>WTO, requesting that we change the logo. While we wish that the WTO agreed
>with our assessment that the two logos contain substantial differences and
>could co-exist, we understand their concern. We still believe that there
>are some significant differences between the Wikivoyage logo and the WTO,
>however, such arguments are not guaranteed to win if we were to legally
>oppose this request because there are also some substantial similarities.
>With this in mind, as well as the fact that the Wikivoyage logo is still
>relatively new and has not had a chance to build significant brand
>recognition yet, we believe the better solution is to hold a new community
>contest for a new logo.

Will the current Wikivoyage logo be an option in this upcoming logo
selection contest? If the Wikivoyage community is strongly in favor of
retaining the logo it already approved, what are options?

I don't believe there's any precedent for the Wikimedia Foundation vetoing
a community-approved logo in this manner. (Is there?) This seems like
unchartered territory for Wikimedia, so it's important to be cautious and
careful, I think.

>We believe that the community is the best body to decide what logo should
>represent their hard work and hope that interested community members will
>take this opportunity to once again showcase their creativity and talent
>by submitting designs.

As I posted on the relevant Meta-Wiki talk page just now, the Wikimedia
community cannot feel rushed or pressured to accept this new logo
selection procedure. Typically a discussion of this nature would last at
least thirty days, from my experience.

This leaves two options, as I see it: pushing back the timeline for the
selection of a Wikivoyage logo by a few weeks or not using this procedure
for the selection of the next Wikivoyage logo.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Maggie Dennis
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:21 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Michelle Paulson wrote:
> >Since then, the Foundation has received a cease-and-desist letter from the
> >WTO, requesting that we change the logo. While we wish that the WTO agreed
> >with our assessment that the two logos contain substantial differences and
> >could co-exist, we understand their concern. We still believe that there
> >are some significant differences between the Wikivoyage logo and the WTO,
> >however, such arguments are not guaranteed to win if we were to legally
> >oppose this request because there are also some substantial similarities.
> >With this in mind, as well as the fact that the Wikivoyage logo is still
> >relatively new and has not had a chance to build significant brand
> >recognition yet, we believe the better solution is to hold a new community
> >contest for a new logo.
>
> Will the current Wikivoyage logo be an option in this upcoming logo
> selection contest? If the Wikivoyage community is strongly in favor of
> retaining the logo it already approved, what are options?
>


On behalf of a Wikivoyager, I've already asked the legal team if
derivatives of the current logo would be usable, and I'm afraid the answer
is no. It must be a new logo.


> I don't believe there's any precedent for the Wikimedia Foundation vetoing
> a community-approved logo in this manner. (Is there?) This seems like
> unchartered territory for Wikimedia, so it's important to be cautious and
> careful, I think.
>
>
I think that the reason why there's no precedent is because this is the
first time that we have run into a trademark infringement claim against a
logo.


> >We believe that the community is the best body to decide what logo should
> >represent their hard work and hope that interested community members will
> >take this opportunity to once again showcase their creativity and talent
> >by submitting designs.
>
> As I posted on the relevant Meta-Wiki talk page just now, the Wikimedia
> community cannot feel rushed or pressured to accept this new logo
> selection procedure. Typically a discussion of this nature would last at
> least thirty days, from my experience.
>
> This leaves two options, as I see it: pushing back the timeline for the
> selection of a Wikivoyage logo by a few weeks or not using this procedure
> for the selection of the next Wikivoyage logo.
>
>
The question of process is one for Meta, where discussion is already
underway. No reason to fracture it. :) I appreciate your input there.

Maggie


--
Maggie Dennis
Senior Community Advocate
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Peter Southwood
Has anyone done a search on other logos with similar characteristics, to see
how much they differ? I think the WTO is taking a chance with this. Which
specific aspects do they object to?
Peter Southwood.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Maggie Dennis" <[hidden email]>
To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 5:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo


> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:21 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Michelle Paulson wrote:
>> >Since then, the Foundation has received a cease-and-desist letter from
>> >the
>> >WTO, requesting that we change the logo. While we wish that the WTO
>> >agreed
>> >with our assessment that the two logos contain substantial differences
>> >and
>> >could co-exist, we understand their concern. We still believe that there
>> >are some significant differences between the Wikivoyage logo and the
>> >WTO,
>> >however, such arguments are not guaranteed to win if we were to legally
>> >oppose this request because there are also some substantial
>> >similarities.
>> >With this in mind, as well as the fact that the Wikivoyage logo is still
>> >relatively new and has not had a chance to build significant brand
>> >recognition yet, we believe the better solution is to hold a new
>> >community
>> >contest for a new logo.
>>
>> Will the current Wikivoyage logo be an option in this upcoming logo
>> selection contest? If the Wikivoyage community is strongly in favor of
>> retaining the logo it already approved, what are options?
>>
>
>
> On behalf of a Wikivoyager, I've already asked the legal team if
> derivatives of the current logo would be usable, and I'm afraid the answer
> is no. It must be a new logo.
>
>
>> I don't believe there's any precedent for the Wikimedia Foundation
>> vetoing
>> a community-approved logo in this manner. (Is there?) This seems like
>> unchartered territory for Wikimedia, so it's important to be cautious and
>> careful, I think.
>>
>>
> I think that the reason why there's no precedent is because this is the
> first time that we have run into a trademark infringement claim against a
> logo.
>
>
>> >We believe that the community is the best body to decide what logo
>> >should
>> >represent their hard work and hope that interested community members
>> >will
>> >take this opportunity to once again showcase their creativity and talent
>> >by submitting designs.
>>
>> As I posted on the relevant Meta-Wiki talk page just now, the Wikimedia
>> community cannot feel rushed or pressured to accept this new logo
>> selection procedure. Typically a discussion of this nature would last at
>> least thirty days, from my experience.
>>
>> This leaves two options, as I see it: pushing back the timeline for the
>> selection of a Wikivoyage logo by a few weeks or not using this procedure
>> for the selection of the next Wikivoyage logo.
>>
>>
> The question of process is one for Meta, where discussion is already
> underway. No reason to fracture it. :) I appreciate your input there.
>
> Maggie
>
>
> --
> Maggie Dennis
> Senior Community Advocate
> Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Craig Franklin
I'm sure that the legal team has done their homework on this and would not
have made this recommendation unless they felt that the WTO had a credible
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.

Cheers,
Craig Franklin



On 1 June 2013 19:59, Peter Southwood <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Has anyone done a search on other logos with similar characteristics, to
> see how much they differ? I think the WTO is taking a chance with this.
> Which specific aspects do they object to?
> Peter Southwood.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Maggie Dennis" <[hidden email]>
> To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <[hidden email].**org<[hidden email]>
> >
> Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 5:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo
>
>
>
>  On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:21 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>  Michelle Paulson wrote:
>>> >Since then, the Foundation has received a cease-and-desist letter from
>>> >the
>>> >WTO, requesting that we change the logo. While we wish that the WTO
>>> >agreed
>>> >with our assessment that the two logos contain substantial differences
>>> >and
>>> >could co-exist, we understand their concern. We still believe that there
>>> >are some significant differences between the Wikivoyage logo and the
>>> >WTO,
>>> >however, such arguments are not guaranteed to win if we were to legally
>>> >oppose this request because there are also some substantial
>>> >similarities.
>>> >With this in mind, as well as the fact that the Wikivoyage logo is still
>>> >relatively new and has not had a chance to build significant brand
>>> >recognition yet, we believe the better solution is to hold a new
>>> >community
>>> >contest for a new logo.
>>>
>>> Will the current Wikivoyage logo be an option in this upcoming logo
>>> selection contest? If the Wikivoyage community is strongly in favor of
>>> retaining the logo it already approved, what are options?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> On behalf of a Wikivoyager, I've already asked the legal team if
>> derivatives of the current logo would be usable, and I'm afraid the answer
>> is no. It must be a new logo.
>>
>>
>>  I don't believe there's any precedent for the Wikimedia Foundation
>>> vetoing
>>> a community-approved logo in this manner. (Is there?) This seems like
>>> unchartered territory for Wikimedia, so it's important to be cautious and
>>> careful, I think.
>>>
>>>
>>>  I think that the reason why there's no precedent is because this is the
>> first time that we have run into a trademark infringement claim against a
>> logo.
>>
>>
>>  >We believe that the community is the best body to decide what logo
>>> >should
>>> >represent their hard work and hope that interested community members
>>> >will
>>> >take this opportunity to once again showcase their creativity and talent
>>> >by submitting designs.
>>>
>>> As I posted on the relevant Meta-Wiki talk page just now, the Wikimedia
>>> community cannot feel rushed or pressured to accept this new logo
>>> selection procedure. Typically a discussion of this nature would last at
>>> least thirty days, from my experience.
>>>
>>> This leaves two options, as I see it: pushing back the timeline for the
>>> selection of a Wikivoyage logo by a few weeks or not using this procedure
>>> for the selection of the next Wikivoyage logo.
>>>
>>>
>>>  The question of process is one for Meta, where discussion is already
>> underway. No reason to fracture it. :) I appreciate your input there.
>>
>> Maggie
>>
>>
>> --
>> Maggie Dennis
>> Senior Community Advocate
>> Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Peter Southwood
I would still like an answer to my questions
Cheers,
Peter Southwood
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Franklin" <[hidden email]>
To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo


> I'm sure that the legal team has done their homework on this and would not
> have made this recommendation unless they felt that the WTO had a credible
> 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.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig Franklin
>
>
>
> On 1 June 2013 19:59, Peter Southwood <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Has anyone done a search on other logos with similar characteristics, to
>> see how much they differ? I think the WTO is taking a chance with this.
>> Which specific aspects do they object to?
>> Peter Southwood.
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Maggie Dennis"
>> <[hidden email]>
>> To: "Wikimedia Mailing List"
>> <[hidden email].**org<[hidden email]>
>> >
>> Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 5:39 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo
>>
>>
>>
>>  On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:21 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Michelle Paulson wrote:
>>>> >Since then, the Foundation has received a cease-and-desist letter from
>>>> >the
>>>> >WTO, requesting that we change the logo. While we wish that the WTO
>>>> >agreed
>>>> >with our assessment that the two logos contain substantial differences
>>>> >and
>>>> >could co-exist, we understand their concern. We still believe that
>>>> >there
>>>> >are some significant differences between the Wikivoyage logo and the
>>>> >WTO,
>>>> >however, such arguments are not guaranteed to win if we were to
>>>> >legally
>>>> >oppose this request because there are also some substantial
>>>> >similarities.
>>>> >With this in mind, as well as the fact that the Wikivoyage logo is
>>>> >still
>>>> >relatively new and has not had a chance to build significant brand
>>>> >recognition yet, we believe the better solution is to hold a new
>>>> >community
>>>> >contest for a new logo.
>>>>
>>>> Will the current Wikivoyage logo be an option in this upcoming logo
>>>> selection contest? If the Wikivoyage community is strongly in favor of
>>>> retaining the logo it already approved, what are options?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> On behalf of a Wikivoyager, I've already asked the legal team if
>>> derivatives of the current logo would be usable, and I'm afraid the
>>> answer
>>> is no. It must be a new logo.
>>>
>>>
>>>  I don't believe there's any precedent for the Wikimedia Foundation
>>>> vetoing
>>>> a community-approved logo in this manner. (Is there?) This seems like
>>>> unchartered territory for Wikimedia, so it's important to be cautious
>>>> and
>>>> careful, I think.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  I think that the reason why there's no precedent is because this is
>>>> the
>>> first time that we have run into a trademark infringement claim against
>>> a
>>> logo.
>>>
>>>
>>>  >We believe that the community is the best body to decide what logo
>>>> >should
>>>> >represent their hard work and hope that interested community members
>>>> >will
>>>> >take this opportunity to once again showcase their creativity and
>>>> >talent
>>>> >by submitting designs.
>>>>
>>>> As I posted on the relevant Meta-Wiki talk page just now, the Wikimedia
>>>> community cannot feel rushed or pressured to accept this new logo
>>>> selection procedure. Typically a discussion of this nature would last
>>>> at
>>>> least thirty days, from my experience.
>>>>
>>>> This leaves two options, as I see it: pushing back the timeline for the
>>>> selection of a Wikivoyage logo by a few weeks or not using this
>>>> procedure
>>>> for the selection of the next Wikivoyage logo.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  The question of process is one for Meta, where discussion is already
>>> underway. No reason to fracture it. :) I appreciate your input there.
>>>
>>> Maggie
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Maggie Dennis
>>> Senior Community Advocate
>>> Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
>> Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Craig Franklin
Craig Franklin wrote:
>I'm sure that the legal team has done their homework on this and would not
>have made this recommendation unless they felt that the WTO had a credible
>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 seen
both logos and while they're obviously similar, I'm sure there are a great
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?

Presenting a logo selection procedure from a black box and then trying to
pressure the community to accept it as global policy within ten days
doesn't seem appropriate to me. "Ten days" is being very generous, as the
draft procedure is only fully translated into two languages at the moment
and we're fast approaching June 2.

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. That is, there's a concern that the people most
involved with Wikivoyage will get drowned out by the much larger Wikimedia
community in any contest of this nature. This needs further thought,
deliberation, and discussion; however this is being rushed by an
apparently hard deadline from the Wikimedia legal team to change the
Wikivoyage logo no later than July 31. This isn't a great situation to be
in.

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.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

K. Peachey-2
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 12:22 AM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
> 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.


Change it to a blank/transparent square for the logo at the current
time, Then let WV take as long as they want to choose a new logo?

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Tomasz W. Kozlowski
K. Peachey wrote:

> Change it to a blank/transparent square for the logo at the current
> time, Then let WV take as long as they want to choose a new logo?

In other words, let's remove their logo, even against their wish, and
then let /them/ come up with a solution?

        -- Tomasz

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Craig Franklin
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
On 2 June 2013 00:22, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Craig Franklin wrote:
> >I'm sure that the legal team has done their homework on this and would not
> >have made this recommendation unless they felt that the WTO had a credible
> >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 seen
> both logos and while they're obviously similar, I'm sure there are a great
> 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 the
> last logo contest. That is, there's a concern that the people most
> involved with Wikivoyage will get drowned out by the much larger Wikimedia
> 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 as
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 to
waste its money fighting this in court.

Cheers,
Craig
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

metasj
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.

> MZM writes:
>> 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.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikivoyage/Lounge#Wikivoyage_Logo

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
on meta).


Craig Franklin writes:
> 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.

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.

Sam.

--
Samuel Klein          @metasj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by Craig Franklin
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.
Cheers,
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Franklin" <[hidden email]>
To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo


> On 2 June 2013 00:22, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Craig Franklin wrote:
>> >I'm sure that the legal team has done their homework on this and would
>> >not
>> >have made this recommendation unless they felt that the WTO had a
>> >credible
>> >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
>> seen
>> both logos and while they're obviously similar, I'm sure there are a
>> great
>> 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
>> the
>> last logo contest. That is, there's a concern that the people most
>> involved with Wikivoyage will get drowned out by the much larger
>> Wikimedia
>> 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
> as
> 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
> to
> waste its money fighting this in court.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Denny Vrandečić
Peter, we stand up to big bullies. As big as they get. But in this case, I
cannot see the WTO bullying us. Their terms are very reasonable in my
opinion, and I am grateful to the legal team for handling this situation
this well.

But in this case, we are talking about either changing a non-established
logo - something that has been discussed anyway before in the community, as
SJ pointed out - or risking to spend donation money on a very expensive
legal battle that, frankly, does not look very promising. And if the court
decides against us, which simply looks probable, we would need to change it
anyway.

Or, to put it differently, Peter: what other programs paid by our budget
would you curtail in order to try defending the Wikivoyage logo? Should we
cut down on development? On supporting chapters? Look at FDC and IEG, and
simply weight the projects enabled by that money against keeping the
Wikivoyage logo? Is the logo really worth that much?

Our movement fights against big bullies. Be it in the legislative branch,
where we use protest and lobbying, be it in the judicial branch, where we
defend volunteers in court, be it in the executive branch, where our
methods are cooperation and mutual support.

But I fail to see what the benefit of this particular fight would be in
reaching our mission. The costs, on the other hand, can be drastic.





2013/6/2 Peter Southwood <[hidden email]>

> 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.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Franklin" <
> [hidden email]>
> To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <[hidden email].**org<[hidden email]>
> >
> Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 5:00 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo
>
>
>  On 2 June 2013 00:22, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>  Craig Franklin wrote:
>>> >I'm sure that the legal team has done their homework on this and would
>>> >not
>>> >have made this recommendation unless they felt that the WTO had a
>>> >credible
>>> >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
>>> seen
>>> both logos and while they're obviously similar, I'm sure there are a
>>> great
>>> 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
>>> the
>>> last logo contest. That is, there's a concern that the people most
>>> involved with Wikivoyage will get drowned out by the much larger
>>> Wikimedia
>>> 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
>> as
>> 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
>> to
>> waste its money fighting this in court.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Craig
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>



--
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de

Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Federico Leva (Nemo)
In reply to this post by Peter Southwood
Peter Southwood, 02/06/2013 07:43:
> 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.

Why would you want to share visual identity with a bully?

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Deryck Chan-2
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
MZM,

"This time" misses the point of risk management - it's all probabilistic
rather than deterministic. It is totally reasonable for WMF to have judged
that the differences between the two logos are large enough that a
trademark claim is sufficiently *unlikely* to happen. But outliers do occur
and in this case WTO chose (against perceived odds) to make a claim. And
it's totally reasonable, too, for the WMF to now judge that the risks of
going to court about this logo isn't worth fighting.

Saying that WMF must've made a mistake last time because they allowed the
logo in the first place but then gave in on the trademark claim simply
misses the point.

Deryck
(Putting his engineer hat on. Ironically engineers typically fight against,
not defend, lawyers when they invoke arguments from statistical science.)
On 1 Jun 2013 15:22, "MZMcBride" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Craig Franklin wrote:
> >I'm sure that the legal team has done their homework on this and would not
> >have made this recommendation unless they felt that the WTO had a credible
> >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 seen
> both logos and while they're obviously similar, I'm sure there are a great
> 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?
>
> Presenting a logo selection procedure from a black box and then trying to
> pressure the community to accept it as global policy within ten days
> doesn't seem appropriate to me. "Ten days" is being very generous, as the
> draft procedure is only fully translated into two languages at the moment
> and we're fast approaching June 2.
>
> 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. That is, there's a concern that the people most
> involved with Wikivoyage will get drowned out by the much larger Wikimedia
> community in any contest of this nature. This needs further thought,
> deliberation, and discussion; however this is being rushed by an
> apparently hard deadline from the Wikimedia legal team to change the
> Wikivoyage logo no later than July 31. This isn't a great situation to be
> in.
>
> 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.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Liam Wyatt
In reply to this post by Denny Vrandečić
Very eloquently put Denny.
I think your point is very well made that independently of what we as
individuals think about the legal Trademark merits of this particular case,
or the community processes of choosing a logo, the point remains that our
fighting this would not help to serve the mission (either in a practical
sense or an ideological sense) and could potentially lose us a lot of time
and money that would be better spent elsewhere.

It is unfortunate that it has come to this situation, but WMF-Legal has
made this decision not because the WTO's budget is bigger than ours, but
because their claim is sensible. I would hope that we would always say "ok"
when other organisations ask sensible things from us, and we always say
"no" when other organisations ask stupid things of us. In both cases these
decisions should be made on the merits of the situation and independently
of the size of the organisation asking. Simply because the WTO is "big"
doesn't mean that everything they say is bullying (although they certainly
do bully when they want to).

- Liam / Wittylama

On 2 June 2013 07:27, Denny Vrandečić <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Peter, we stand up to big bullies. As big as they get. But in this case, I
> cannot see the WTO bullying us. Their terms are very reasonable in my
> opinion, and I am grateful to the legal team for handling this situation
> this well.
>
> But in this case, we are talking about either changing a non-established
> logo - something that has been discussed anyway before in the community, as
> SJ pointed out - or risking to spend donation money on a very expensive
> legal battle that, frankly, does not look very promising. And if the court
> decides against us, which simply looks probable, we would need to change it
> anyway.
>
> Or, to put it differently, Peter: what other programs paid by our budget
> would you curtail in order to try defending the Wikivoyage logo? Should we
> cut down on development? On supporting chapters? Look at FDC and IEG, and
> simply weight the projects enabled by that money against keeping the
> Wikivoyage logo? Is the logo really worth that much?
>
> Our movement fights against big bullies. Be it in the legislative branch,
> where we use protest and lobbying, be it in the judicial branch, where we
> defend volunteers in court, be it in the executive branch, where our
> methods are cooperation and mutual support.
>
> But I fail to see what the benefit of this particular fight would be in
> reaching our mission. The costs, on the other hand, can be drastic.
>
>
> 2013/6/2 Peter Southwood <[hidden email]>
>
> > 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.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Peter Southwood
On 2 June 2013 06:43, Peter Southwood <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 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.


The principle being applied here is, I think, "do the right thing".
The WTO is going out of their way to be decent about a logo that, to
many a casual eye (including mine, and that of those who already
flagged this as a problem in the original logo discussion) does look
really quite a lot like theirs. Saying "whoops, sorry" and trying
again is the right thing to do.

Defending what is in fact your trademark does not make you a bully;
Wikimedia defends its trademarks without being a "big bully" (though
it has been accused of such by some, e.g. the EFF).


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

Peter Southwood
Perhaps I missed something, because to me their logo does not look much like
the WV logo. I would think that to anyone familiar with either of the logos,
the other would be immediately recognised as different. Anyone who has the
pattern recognition abilities to read should see that they differ without
having to take a second glance.
So what is their objection? (my actual question in the first instance)
Cheers,
Peter

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Gerard" <[hidden email]>
To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2013 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo


> On 2 June 2013 06:43, Peter Southwood <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>
> The principle being applied here is, I think, "do the right thing".
> The WTO is going out of their way to be decent about a logo that, to
> many a casual eye (including mine, and that of those who already
> flagged this as a problem in the original logo discussion) does look
> really quite a lot like theirs. Saying "whoops, sorry" and trying
> again is the right thing to do.
>
> Defending what is in fact your trademark does not make you a bully;
> Wikimedia defends its trademarks without being a "big bully" (though
> it has been accused of such by some, e.g. the EFF).
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

phoebe ayers-3
In reply to this post by Federico Leva (Nemo)
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Peter Southwood, 02/06/2013 07:43:
>
>  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.
>>
>
> Why would you want to share visual identity with a bully?
>
> Nemo


Ha! +1 :)

And also what Denny, Deryck and SJ said.

-- phoebe


--
* I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers <at>
gmail.com *
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Deryck Chan-2
Deryck Chan wrote:

>"This time" misses the point of risk management - it's all probabilistic
>rather than deterministic. It is totally reasonable for WMF to have judged
>that the differences between the two logos are large enough that a
>trademark claim is sufficiently *unlikely* to happen. But outliers do
>occur
>and in this case WTO chose (against perceived odds) to make a claim. And
>it's totally reasonable, too, for the WMF to now judge that the risks of
>going to court about this logo isn't worth fighting.
>
>Saying that WMF must've made a mistake last time because they allowed the
>logo in the first place but then gave in on the trademark claim simply
>misses the point.

Very well put. :-)

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
12