well put. I think that clearly WMF legal department assumed that having the
trademark registered is such a good idea that it does not require a
dialogue with the community, while the symbolic beginnings and the history
of logo creation make such a move, especially without a prior discussion
and
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl wrote:
well put. I think that clearly WMF legal department assumed that having the
trademark registered is such a good idea that it does not require a
dialogue with the community,
My _general_ problem, however, that I have
2013/3/20 James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
I won't argue the fact that there is value in protecting the
iconography of the Wikimedia movement from abuse. What I argue with is
the approach of the legal department - to
This is indeed why I dislike the whole trademark move. Not because I don't
understand the difference between trademarks and copyright, but probably I
have different goals in mind. It is a natural state for a legal team to
play defensive, and protect. I can't blame them for that, although the
Hi, Nathan-
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
I won't argue the fact that there is value in protecting the
iconography of the Wikimedia movement from abuse. What I argue with is
the approach of the legal department
You're right that we could have communicated
:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Toolserver-l] [TS logo] Fwd: Free as in Wikimedia Foundation
To: Wikimedia Toolserver toolserve...@lists.wikimedia.org
What a nonsense issue. This superfluous discussion is fueled by two
fallacies, the confusion of copyright and trademarking and an
unhealthy paranoia
James Alexander, 19/03/2013 20:17:
The amount of bad faith some people
have been showing in this discussion is depressing.
+1
Nemo
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
I won't argue the fact that there is value in protecting the
iconography of the Wikimedia movement from abuse. What I argue with is
the approach of the legal department - to unilaterally, and without
notice, contradict the
