[OSGeo-Board] FW: shirt logos

[Michael P. Gerlek]

Just a point to consider:

I think I'm partially responsible for bringing up this issue again,
because a couple weeks ago an individual asked me if he could print up a
bunch of shirts with the OSGeo logo, specifically so that he could sell
them at a profit to make money for his local open source geo
organization.

I brought this to the board's attention because I was personally
surprised by this move.  Prior to receiving that email, I would have
claimed such a situation was only a theoretical worst-case.

-mpg
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Allan Doyle [mailto:adoyle at eogeo.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 8:29 AM
> To: Dave McIlhagga
> Cc: Arnulf Christl; board at board.osgeo.org; Jennifer Daehler; 
> rich at richsteele.org; Michael P. Gerlek
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Board] FW: shirt logos
> 
> Since I'm somehow cc'ed on this again, I guess I get to comment :)
> 
> I like Arnulf's analysis and am +1 on it. There are several places  
> where we can slide into corporate-think and completely lose 
> the OSGeo  
> bubble. If people are misusing our logo, our best defense is to make  
> sure everyone knows that their use is inappropriate. We don't 
> have to  
> sue them to do that. We have to make other kinds of noise.
> 
> We're setting out to show that openness is the Way Forward. Does  
> Linus have a trademark on Linux? He does, in fact. Did that prevent  
> 193 other Linux-related registrations at the uspto.gov? No. See also  
> [1]...
> 
> How about some others?
> 
> OpenBSD - no
> NetBSD - yes
> FreeBSD - yes
> Geoserver - yes (Not "ours", Owned by Raytheon...)
> Geotools - yes (Not "ours", owned by Geotools Software Solutions)
> Mapserver - no (was registered to two other companies in the past)
> Mapbender - no
> Apache - 152 registrations with "apache" in them.
> 
> I don't see how it helps or hurts to have the TM or the 
> registration.  
> Sure, if we use the "TM" and later someone else registers it, we can  
> sue them, but it's not clear to me that there's a need.
> 
> 	Allan
> 
> [1] http://slashdot.org/articles/99/12/16/1248216.shtml
> 
> On Jul 26, 2006, at 11:03, Dave McIlhagga wrote:
> 
> > If by not doing our due diligence on this -- do we not risk third  
> > parties preventing us from our own freedom to use our own 
> logos and  
> > wording?
> >
> > Also - if OSGeo is being misrepresented by a third party - is that  
> > OK? Are we comfortable with allowing anybody to use OSGeo in any  
> > context they desire? By having adequate legal protection, we at  
> > least reserve the right to take action *if* a real problem should  
> > come up.
> >
> > I don't have the answers to these questions as I'm not a lawyer --  
> > but that's why I think taking legal opinion seriously on this is  
> > important.
> >
> > If Trademark registration gives us the freedom to behave in 
> the way  
> > we want to as an organization, is that not a good thing?
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> > Arnulf Christl wrote:
> >> On Tue, July 25, 2006 15:05, Dave McIlhagga wrote:
> >>> Agreed with Frank - if we can get protection of "OSGeo" 
> and "Open  
> >>> Source
> >>> Geospatial Foundation" - that would be sensible.
> >>>
> >>> Dave
> >> Against whom or what do we need any protection? What kind of  
> >> protection
> >> are we really going to get?
> >> ...
> >> Using the "TM" lets the world know that the organization 
> considers  
> >> its
> >> marks to be proprietary
> >> ...
> >> Oh, funny that this word comes up here. :-) No the word is not  
> >> bad. But we
> >> do not need a small letter to tell the world that we 
> really mean it.
> >> ...
> >> and allows the organization to start to develop some goodwill in  
> >> the marks.
> >> ...
> >> Bear with me doing some 'lost in translation yoga' on 'goodwill'.  
> >> Using
> >> dict.leo.org it translates into 'Firmenwert' (company 
> value [comm.]),
> >> 'Kulanz' (amiability, fairness, goodwill, kindness, obligingness,  
> >> fair
> >> dealing [econ.]) or 'Wohlwollen' (benevolence, courtesy,  
> >> friendliness).
> >> What kind of goodwill is protection by a tiny superior 
> letter (thats
> >> something like a tiny virago) going to give us?
> >> ...
> >> Eventually, if OSGEO obtains a registration for its marks, then  
> >> you'll
> >> switch to using an "(R)" in superscript.
> >> ...
> >> If you really want to know before switching - and as board 
> member and
> >> voter you should very much feel obliged to - then read through  
> >> this page:
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_trademark
> >> In my opinion there are way too many backlinks to copyright, legal
> >> enforcement, commercial property ownership and licensing to make  
> >> me like
> >> any of it in the context of OSGeo. We are not aiming at being yet  
> >> another
> >> traditional company, we are a foundation.
> >> ...
> >> Very rough estimate of the fees to file one trademark in the U.S.
> >> (including attorney time to prepare the application) are: 
> $1100-1500.
> >> This is just to file the application. Occasionally with some  
> >> trademark
> >> applications, you have problems with the trademark office  
> >> objecting to
> >> the mark or a third party opposing the application. If 
> this happens,
> >> additional fees will apply.  Based on what I've seen so 
> far, I don't
> >> have any reason to believe that a third party would oppose 
> "OSGEO" or
> >> the "OPEN SOURCE GEOPSPATIAL FOUNDATION" (our informal Google  
> >> searches
> >> came up very clean) but that is difficult to know in advance.
> >> ...
> >> OK, so the registration valid for the US only would cost us 1500  
> >> bucks
> >> (while we are shy of 300 to pay for lousy shirts...). To get some  
> >> real
> >> 'protection' we'd need to register with more countries. 
> Real costs  
> >> only
> >> start when someone somebody actually really starts bugging us by  
> >> stealing
> >> logo or words. The 'protection' by registering the trademark does  
> >> not give
> >> us anything beyond a theoretical right that has to be enforced by  
> >> someone
> >> who will cost us the real money.
> >> Even without any (R)s we have quite a fair chance of being 
> protected:
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ 
> >> Registered_trademark#Enforcing_trademark_rights
> >> Having said all this bear in mind that I am a bloody 
> layman. I am not
> >> saying that anything that Jennifer Daehler said is not legally  
> >> completely
> >> correct and makes all the sense from the perspective of a large and
> >> well-fortified corporation. I am not saying either that it would  
> >> not be
> >> perfectly legally correct to do it. It might even feel 
> like common  
> >> sense
> >> to do it. I do question whether this kind of sense is what 
> we need to
> >> protect OSGeo.org.
> >> Therefore I vote -1 on TM or (C) or (R) superscript in the 
> logo or  
> >> on the
> >> web page. If you like those superior letters then in Borgs name  
> >> put an
> >> (O)pen there or a (F)ree or a (L)eft.
> >> Best regards,
> >> (still on vacation until 2006.08.04)
> >>> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> >>>> Gary Lang wrote:
> >>>>> Let's take up your suggestion.
> >>>>> Board: do we want to do this?
> >>>>> +1 from me
> >>>> Folks,
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm +1 on using the (tm) with OSGeo.   If we have board support  
> >>>> on the
> >>>> idea, I'll take it up with WebCom to update the web site 
> to use it.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On the issue of registration: if the organization would 
> like to  
> >>>>> pursue
> >>>>> it and funds permitting, my suggestion would be to 
> register the  
> >>>>> word
> >>>>> mark "OSGEO" and (again, funds/desire permitting) the 
> word mark  
> >>>>> "OPEN
> >>>>> SOURCE GEOSPATIAL FOUNDATION".  I'm less concerned about a logo
> >>>>> registration, especially to the extent that OSGEO or OPEN SOURCE
> >>>>> GEOSPATIAL FOUNDATION are an element of the logo -- I'd  
> >>>>> recommend just
> >>>>> continuing to designate the logo with a "TM" in superscript.
> >>>> My understanding was that "Open Source Geospatial Foundation" is
> >>>> descriptive
> >>>> and so would be difficult to protect as a trademark.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> >>> -
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: board-unsubscribe at board.osgeo.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: board-help at board.osgeo.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: board-unsubscribe at board.osgeo.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: board-help at board.osgeo.org
> 
> -- 
> Allan Doyle
> +1.781.433.2695
> adoyle at eogeo.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: board-unsubscribe at board.osgeo.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: board-help at board.osgeo.org
> 
>