On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 at 18:55, Soren Stoutner <so...@debian.org> wrote:
>
> (something that the Free Software Foundation recommends as a best
> practice, although it has become uncommon in recent years).
>
Guess why (no need to answer, it is a rhetorical question)
> Trademark law (which varies by country) basically says that nobody else can
> impersonate your business by using your name or your logo in such a way that a
> customer or user would think that they are you. So, when you license software
> under the GPL, anyone can copy and redistribute it, but trademark law says
> they have to change the name and logo enough that the users can tell the
> difference between your project and theirs.
Agree. Also Daniel Hakimi expressed the same opinion about trademark protection.
However, it should not be added the (R) registration symbol unless the
trademark is registered, it is an abuse. It might pass unobserved, but
in case of a legal confrontation it will not pass unobserved and it is
NOT working as (C) copyright symbol that you put it because you want
to reclaim some or all rights. Please, avoid using (R) or [TM] unless
you completed the related procedures. Damages can be claimed for such
abuses, in peculiar cases which is not a good idea to describe in
order to not give "suggestion to IP scammers".
Finally, trademark law (which varies by country) is as keen to
recognise an image as a business logo which use is reserved as much
the copyright terms on that image is similar to the trademark
protection. By the opposite, lesser as much the copyright terms are
far away from the trademark protection. Why? In the second case, it
means: you might think that I am using this image for branding and
marketing but I am not, hence leverage the copyright terms which
allows you bla-bla. In the first case, it means: you might think that
you can imitate my image as your trademark because I did not register
it but its use and the copyright terms are clearly indicating that it
was my will to use it specifically for branding and marketing
something.
After all, the registration has a cost and usually common people
including sw developers require professional support for completing
such registration. I did in the past, you might think that it is not
difficult. However, its effectiveness depends on the registration
details. It is not a matter as delicate as patenting, lesser but still
tricky. Usually, it is better to adopt a zero-budget, zero-effort
approach and when the brand has been recognised starting to be
valuable, it maxy worth hiring a professionist for registering it.
Which is the best way for starting with a zero-budget, zero-effort
approach? Difficult to say about the best. However, among the Creative
Commons licenses the BY-NC-ND is the best match for an artwork which
is intended to be used as a trademark. Moreover, the Creative Commons
licenses are very well known and established which is a great
advantage. Every {layer, judge, arbiter, professionist} who is working
in "intellectual property" (you might dislike this definition but they
still use it) knows the Creative Commons licenses. Hence, they do not
have to spend time reading the terms in every detail and deeply
thinking about it. This makes them more comfortable in providing
protection at cheaper price and shorter time.
Choosing another license or even writing by yourself the "perfect"
copyright terms to fit as much as possible the trademark protection
and you will need to explain to all the other people, instead. Which
is exactly what FSF faced when they tried to promote the GPL v2 and
after the GPL v3. In both cases, they faced strong resistance. Nothing
scares lawyers more than novelties and the unknown.
I hope this helps, R-
