On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Christian Marc Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Sean and Marketing, > > just to weigh in on the "fun" (naming) part: I think that generally > everything makes sense, and I like the direction. The resulting visual brand > language would be very clear, and I agree with the idea of having the word > "sugar" appear in color and the remaining text in gray. > > My feeling though is that the tag line should be less ambiguous than some > of the examples below. I responded most to "a sugar creation". Building off > Intel's Intel Inside, how about: "sugar added" (or something similar)?
+1 That's remarkably clever. I also do like that it avoids a "prefix" before the word "sugar". Though I understand the use of the article, I think that placing "sugar" first has the potential to look cleanest, and also opens the door to a "stacked" variant of the logo which might work in more confined spaces. Eben > > > Christian > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Sean DALY <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> cc to the Design Team, FYI ! >> thanks >> Sean >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Sean DALY <[email protected]> >> Date: Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 7:22 PM >> Subject: A label for Sugar distributions - plan to rework classic >> "ingredient" branding and include it in our trademark policy >> To: Sugar Labs Marketing <[email protected]>, SLOBs >> <[email protected]> >> Cc: Karen Sandler <[email protected]> >> >> >> Marketers, >> >> We will soon complete the Sugar Labs trademark policy (draft is here: >> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Governance/Trademark). It's >> been a topic of work and discussion in the past few SLOBs meetings. >> >> The goal of this policy is not just to protect Sugar Labs marks from >> confusion, but to promote Sugar brand awareness. Specifically, to >> avoid confusion over what precisely Sugar Labs and the Sugar on a >> Stick "distribution" are, while encouraging other projects to build >> and develop their own distributions with Sugar, especially liveUSB >> solutions which have the best probability of overcoming the OS >> installation barrier. >> >> The best way for an alternate self-contained Sugar distribution to >> avoid confusion with Sugar and SoaS is to use a different name. Yet, >> at the same time we need to build the Sugar brand name beyond Sugar >> the project and Sugar on a Stick. And of course we wish to support all >> distributions with Sugar (weak as the distro and desktop brands are). >> How can we do this? >> >> My idea is to create a label program, licensing our marks. This is >> sometimes called "ingredient marketing", defined as "an ingredient or >> component of a product that has its own brand identity". It's an old >> idea - Ray Dolby did it with sound equipment from the 1970s (1,2); >> Intel had huge success with the "intel inside" marketing campaign >> begun in 1991 (3,4,5). Other examples are TetraPak bricks, Shimano >> bicycle parts, NutraSweet sweeteners, GoreTex fabric, DuPont's Teflon. >> >> Ray Dolby became fabulously rich with his licensing program. I propose >> we turn the approach inside out and take inspiration from free >> software licensing. With this approach, licensing of Sugar Labs >> trademarks will be free, simple and easy as long as certain conditions >> are respected by the licensee, in particular: >> >> * Sugar Labs be informed by e-mail to the trademark alias of the >> project's sponsor, URL, contact information, and proposed project name >> (not a name used by Sugar Labs, e.g. "Sugar on a Stick"), with >> positive reply; >> * The project's page not display Sugar marks too prominently, to avoid >> confusion in visitors unaware of the SL site; the project's page links >> to the SL website; >> * SFC/Sugar Labs reserves the right to revoke the license >> * others? >> >> >> When would licensing not be routine, i.e. require consideration before >> licensing? >> * project name or logo or URL too close to our marks, risk of confusion >> * insistence on association of another brand with Sugar >> * inclusion of nonfree software with Sugar >> * others? >> >> >> What could motivate us to revoke a license? >> * atrocious product quality with no bugfixing >> * abandonment of a project (imagine the horror of a well-referenced >> but old and unmaintained distro) >> * confusing marketing, not respecting the spirit of our license >> * using SL marks in conjunction with other marks in ways which could >> imply SL partnership or endorsement which doesn't exist >> * refusal to comply with Sugar software's licenses (GPL) >> * others? >> >> Naturally, in the above cases we will want to reflect upon what >> recourse we would have if a licensee started creating problems. >> >> >> Intel achieved their fabulous brand awareness (Nr. 23 in the 2009 >> Millward Brown Brandz Top 100) mostly due to pharaonic advertising >> spend. We won't have that budget, so we will be inventing cheaper and >> more effective ways of supporting Sugar distributions. I believe a >> label program can help us support a diverse group of Sugar projects, >> growing the Sugar brand and increasing Sugar adoption in schools and >> homes. >> >> >> OK, after objectives, examples, and theory, comes the fun (and >> difficult) part - choosing the label text - our "circled intel inside >> sticker", if you will. I believe the best approach is to communicate >> the *idea* of a remix or a spin, but without using those words (which >> have DJ connotations); one of Sugar's brand values is playfulness, and >> we get to call our remixes something different from everybody else :D. >> So perhaps best to keep the sweet tooth association, such as has >> served us well with ice cream flavors for SoaS versions: >> >> a sugar treat >> a sugar confection >> a sugar refinement >> a sugar preparation >> a sugar mix >> a sugar concoction >> a sugar recipe >> a sugar formula >> a sugar sprinkling >> a sugar crystal >> >> Alternatively, a more technical word could work; it might even be >> preferable, so that teachers understand that Sugar is computer >> software, e.g.: >> >> a sugar construction >> a sugar formation >> a sugar creation >> a sugar variety >> a sugar variation >> a sugar difference >> a sugar combination >> a sugar special >> >> I use the "a" article to imply there are others; but perhaps someone >> has a different idea? >> >> Visually speaking, I would see our logo typeface (VAG Rounded Light) >> with the word "sugar" being one of the random color combinations and >> the other words in grey. The sugar mark will need the (R) of course, >> and if the label is online it should link to the SL site, perhaps even >> a page explaining what "a sugar xxx" is. >> >> Input greatly appreciated. >> >> Sean. >> >> >> 1. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/journals/njtip/v2/n1/4/ >> 2. >> http://www.dolby.com/professional/technology/licensing/getting-licensed.html >> 3. http://www.intel.com/pressroom/intel_inside.htm >> 4. >> http://www.intangiblebusiness.com/Brand-Services/Marketing-Services/News/Ingredient-branding-case-study-Intel~466.html >> 5. >> http://tpmtoday.blogspot.com/2007/04/thoughts-on-ingredient-marketing.html > > > > -- > [email protected] > 917/ 575 0013 > > http://www.christianmarcschmidt.com > http://www.linkedin.com/in/christianmarcschmidt > http://twitter.com/cms_ > _______________________________________________ Marketing mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing
