[DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

steve_rowe
I want to finish addressing the Project Branding Requirements at <http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html>.  

One of the outstanding issues is stamping our graphics with "TM".  From <http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html#graphics>:

        Logos are important to recognize as trademarks as well.
        For the project's official logo (if it has one, and
        especially if it uses the ASF feather), ensure that it
        includes a small "TM" symbol in the graphic or
        immediately adjacent to it. For pages that include the
        poject logo on them, ensure you mention "... and the
        Project logo are trademarks..." in the attribution.

There is no room for interpretation here: the requirements say that it must be done.

However, when this was last discussed, in November 2010, several PMC members said they didn't want to do it, AFAICT largely because it would make the logos look ugly:

        http://markmail.org/message/i4mnm3nx6bbq3dgu>

I propose that we take a VOTE, saying that we elect to ignore this aspect of the branding requirements, so that we can close out the effort to comply with the other aspects.

Here's the wording I'm thinking of:

------
Please VOTE to NOT comply with the requirement in the Apache Project Branding Requirements <http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html#graphics> that "TM" be included in or be presented adjacent to all project graphic images on Lucene PMC websites.

[] +1 The Lucene PMC will not put TM in or adjacent to the project graphics on our website
[] -1 The Lucene PMC will comply with the graphics TM requirement in the Apache Project Branding Requirements
------

Thoughts?

I plan on voting +1 if this goes to a VOTE.

Steve

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

Robert Muir
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Steven A Rowe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>         ... ensure that it
>         includes a small "TM" symbol in the graphic or
>         immediately adjacent to it. For pages that include the
>         poject logo on them, ensure you mention "... and the
>         Project logo are trademarks..." in the attribution.
>
> There is no room for interpretation here: the requirements say that it must be done.
>

I dunno, this seems like there is some room for interpretation.
Looking at the old threads it seemed some people didnt want the image
quality screwed up, thats all.

I interpret the statement as "its also ok to add some html that puts a
little TM next to the graphic". Maybe this would be easier to
implement and less controversial.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

steve_rowe
I did a survey of the 184 ASF projects listed on this page: <http://projects.apache.org/indexes/alpha.html> - this is a list of products, not top-level projects, e.g. Lucene Core and Solr are listed separately.

I counted 77 of the 184 (42%) with some form of TM next to at least one graphic image on the site (e.g., Commons products' sites often have TM on the Commons logo, but not on the product logo - I counted these among the 77).  A fair number of the 184 are no longer active (i.e., in the Attic), though, so the percentage of active project with TMs in graphic images is somewhat higher than 42%, maybe something like 45%.

Almost all of the 77 incorporate the TM in the graphic images, rather than placing textual TMs adjacent to the images.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Muir [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 8:17 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Steven A Rowe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>         ... ensure that it
>         includes a small "TM" symbol in the graphic or
>         immediately adjacent to it. For pages that include the
>         poject logo on them, ensure you mention "... and the
>         Project logo are trademarks..." in the attribution.
>
> There is no room for interpretation here: the requirements say that it must be done.
>

I dunno, this seems like there is some room for interpretation.
Looking at the old threads it seemed some people didnt want the image
quality screwed up, thats all.

I interpret the statement as "its also ok to add some html that puts a
little TM next to the graphic". Maybe this would be easier to
implement and less controversial.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

Mark Miller-3
I like to live in the majority for this type of thing :)  Our logo's
seem happy enough to me. I don't see any need to rock the boat.

Our logos and names are protected regardless, and it seems energy is
better spent elsewhere.

I don't think it's a big deal either way, but that itself is why I would
vote to just stay pat.

If 90%+ of the other projects did it, it would have a lot more weight
with me.

bq. Thoughts?

I do think it's better to discuss than jump to a vote - even if we have
discussed before. I strongly believe almost all votes are a last resort,
not a matter of course. The exceptions being voting in new contributors
and for releases. I think the best course of action for these things is
to bring it up again, reference the previous discussion, then if it
needs to go to a vote due to lack of consensus, we start a vote. I know
you brought up discussing before moving to the vote - but this is my
response to "Thoughts?".

My personal opinion, so FWIW.

- Mark

On 09/28/2012 09:11 AM, Steven A Rowe wrote:

> I did a survey of the 184 ASF projects listed on this page: <http://projects.apache.org/indexes/alpha.html> - this is a list of products, not top-level projects, e.g. Lucene Core and Solr are listed separately.
>
> I counted 77 of the 184 (42%) with some form of TM next to at least one graphic image on the site (e.g., Commons products' sites often have TM on the Commons logo, but not on the product logo - I counted these among the 77).  A fair number of the 184 are no longer active (i.e., in the Attic), though, so the percentage of active project with TMs in graphic images is somewhat higher than 42%, maybe something like 45%.
>
> Almost all of the 77 incorporate the TM in the graphic images, rather than placing textual TMs adjacent to the images.
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Muir [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 8:17 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Steven A Rowe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>          ... ensure that it
>>          includes a small "TM" symbol in the graphic or
>>          immediately adjacent to it. For pages that include the
>>          poject logo on them, ensure you mention "... and the
>>          Project logo are trademarks..." in the attribution.
>>
>> There is no room for interpretation here: the requirements say that it must be done.
>>
> I dunno, this seems like there is some room for interpretation.
> Looking at the old threads it seemed some people didnt want the image
> quality screwed up, thats all.
>
> I interpret the statement as "its also ok to add some html that puts a
> little TM next to the graphic". Maybe this would be easier to
> implement and less controversial.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

steve_rowe
Mark,

There are two boats here: the ASF and Lucene/Solr.  Not rocking one will rock the other.

My point in bringing up the possibility of a vote was not to establish consensus (which I think we have already reached: as you say, no need to rock the boat), but rather to go on record for the board about our explicit decision not to follow this aspect of the ASF branding requirements.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Miller [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 10:32 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

I like to live in the majority for this type of thing :)  Our logo's
seem happy enough to me. I don't see any need to rock the boat.

Our logos and names are protected regardless, and it seems energy is
better spent elsewhere.

I don't think it's a big deal either way, but that itself is why I would
vote to just stay pat.

If 90%+ of the other projects did it, it would have a lot more weight
with me.

bq. Thoughts?

I do think it's better to discuss than jump to a vote - even if we have
discussed before. I strongly believe almost all votes are a last resort,
not a matter of course. The exceptions being voting in new contributors
and for releases. I think the best course of action for these things is
to bring it up again, reference the previous discussion, then if it
needs to go to a vote due to lack of consensus, we start a vote. I know
you brought up discussing before moving to the vote - but this is my
response to "Thoughts?".

My personal opinion, so FWIW.

- Mark

On 09/28/2012 09:11 AM, Steven A Rowe wrote:

> I did a survey of the 184 ASF projects listed on this page: <http://projects.apache.org/indexes/alpha.html> - this is a list of products, not top-level projects, e.g. Lucene Core and Solr are listed separately.
>
> I counted 77 of the 184 (42%) with some form of TM next to at least one graphic image on the site (e.g., Commons products' sites often have TM on the Commons logo, but not on the product logo - I counted these among the 77).  A fair number of the 184 are no longer active (i.e., in the Attic), though, so the percentage of active project with TMs in graphic images is somewhat higher than 42%, maybe something like 45%.
>
> Almost all of the 77 incorporate the TM in the graphic images, rather than placing textual TMs adjacent to the images.
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Muir [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 8:17 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Steven A Rowe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>          ... ensure that it
>>          includes a small "TM" symbol in the graphic or
>>          immediately adjacent to it. For pages that include the
>>          poject logo on them, ensure you mention "... and the
>>          Project logo are trademarks..." in the attribution.
>>
>> There is no room for interpretation here: the requirements say that it must be done.
>>
> I dunno, this seems like there is some room for interpretation.
> Looking at the old threads it seemed some people didnt want the image
> quality screwed up, thats all.
>
> I interpret the statement as "its also ok to add some html that puts a
> little TM next to the graphic". Maybe this would be easier to
> implement and less controversial.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

Chris Hostetter-3
In reply to this post by steve_rowe

: Logos are important to recognize as trademarks as well.
: For the project's official logo (if it has one, and
: especially if it uses the ASF feather), ensure that it
: includes a small "TM" symbol in the graphic or
: immediately adjacent to it. For pages that include the
: poject logo on them, ensure you mention "... and the
: Project logo are trademarks..." in the attribution.

For me, the crux of the question/confusion is about the fact that
according to these guidelines, all official logo's "especially if it uses
the ASF feature" must include a small "TM" symbol....

Except that I can find no evidence anywhere on that this specific
"requirement" has been adopted for the ASF feather itself...

        https://www.apache.org/
        https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/
        http://www.apachecon.eu/

I can't find a single ASF page in which the ASF Logo includes an ugly "TM"
-- instead, trademark notice related to the ASF logo seems to be dealt
with on all apache.org pages (that i can find) in the same way that many
companies seem to deal with this sort of thing w/o making their logo ugly:
put a notice at the bottom...

"Apache and the Apache feather logo are trademarks of The Apache Software
Foundation."

I see nothing wrong with putting "Apache Lucene and the Lucene logo are
trademarks of The Apache Software Foundation." at the bottom of our pages.  
Likewise for Solr.  I don't udnerstand why the requirements say that
project Logo's need "TM" in them when foundation logo doesn't.

: I propose that we take a VOTE, saying that we elect to ignore this
: aspect of the branding requirements, so that we can close out the effort
: to comply with the other aspects.
:
: Here's the wording I'm thinking of:

I'm fine with holding a VOTE, but perhaps a better first step is to simply
ask the branding team: "WTF is up with this requirement? We think it
looks ugly, It doesn't seem to be legally require since many trademarked
logos aren't displayed this way on their comany websites, and if it is
required then why isn't the ASF Logo displayed this way?"

-Hoss

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

Mark Miller-3
In reply to this post by steve_rowe
On 09/28/2012 12:57 PM, Steven A Rowe wrote:
> but rather to go on record for the board about our explicit decision not to follow this aspect of the ASF branding requirements.
My feeling is that I would not worry about that at all until the board
was reaching out to us. With the number of projects doing what we are
doing, I can't see the urgency in making any move unprompted. No need to
comfort the baby that is not crying :)

To each his own though - if you think it's important, go for it.

- Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]