Commentary:Use for Software - Revision history

98.149.40.27: /* Section entitled "Uses for which we are granting a license" */

2022-10-24T17:21:59Z

‎Section entitled "Uses for which we are granting a license"

113.210.120.20: /* Law of other jurisdictions */

2020-09-25T07:36:44Z

‎Law of other jurisdictions

Pam: Added info on trademark use for goods that are given away; rearranged page

2013-06-19T21:21:59Z

Added info on trademark use for goods that are given away; rearranged page

Pam: added opening paragraph

2013-03-26T18:49:19Z

added opening paragraph

Pam: Moved content to discussion page

2013-03-26T18:44:34Z

Moved content to discussion page

Gerv at 14:33, 25 March 2013

2013-03-25T14:33:40Z

Gerv at 14:20, 25 March 2013

2013-03-25T14:20:05Z

Pam: /* Commentary on Use for software */

2013-03-03T21:15:54Z

‎Commentary on Use for software

Pam at 21:15, 3 March 2013

2013-03-03T21:15:26Z

Pam: Undo revision 319 by Pam (talk)

2013-03-03T21:04:25Z

Undo revision 319 by Pam (talk)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:21, 24 October 2022
Line 30:		Line 30:

	===== Law of other jurisdictions =====		===== Law of other jurisdictions =====
−
−
−
−

	==== Section entitled "Uses we consider non-infringing" ====		==== Section entitled "Uses we consider non-infringing" ====

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:36, 25 September 2020
Line 12:		Line 12:

	===== Law of other jurisdictions =====		===== Law of other jurisdictions =====
−
−

	==== Section entitled "Uses for which we are granting a license" ====		==== Section entitled "Uses for which we are granting a license" ====

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 ===Commentary on Use for software===
 These guidelines have taken the view that any modification to the software from that found in the official repository requires a trademark license. This includes binary code that is created by a third party from source, i.e., the third-party created binary will be considered modified code. Some open source software providers have had their product combined with malicious software, which negatively affects the reputation of the open source project. For this reason, any software is considered non-authentic if the modification is beyond what is permitted in the guidelines.
-==== Uses for which we are granting a license ====
+===== U.S. law =====
-U.S: A licensee's use of a trademark on goods or services over which the trademark owner does not exercise adequate control may be considered a “naked license” and a form of abandonment of the trademark. In the U.S., this militates that the trademark owner must be able to argue that it has adequately exercised control over the quality of the goods and services with which its mark is used.
+A licensee's use of a trademark on goods or services over which the trademark owner does not exercise adequate control may be considered a “naked license” and a form of abandonment of the trademark. In the U.S., this militates that the trademark owner must be able to argue that it has adequately exercised control over the quality of the goods and services with which its mark is used.
 Although a license granted to unknown users where the quality is controlled solely by describing the attributes that the goods must has never been tested in court, this should be considered adequate control. Therefore, if the adopter of these Guidelines wants to allow the use of the Marks for modified software, the Mark owner must identify a limited number of changes that will not significantly affect the quality of the goods, so that it can say with certainty that any goods using the Marks are of a known quality with known features.
-U.S. law: Limitations on when trademark may be used should be expressed as condition of license, not covenant, so that a failure to meet the limitation is a basis for a trademark infringement claim.
+A license is a defense to an infringement claim, i.e., but for the license the accused use would be a trademark infringement.
-U.S.: Under current U.S. jurisprudence, it is unlikely that any use of a logo would be considered a nominative/referential fair use. Therefore, permission to use the logo may be found  under the licensing provisions, not as a non-infringing use
+Limitations on when trademark may be used should be expressed as condition of license, not covenant, so that a failure to meet the limitation is a basis for a trademark infringement claim.
-====Uses we consider non-infringing====
+Under current U.S. jurisprudence, it is unlikely that any use of a logo would be considered a nominative/referential fair use. Therefore, permission to use the logo may be found  under the licensing provisions, not as a non-infringing use.
 U.S. Under U.S. law, resale of genuine goods is not an infringement as long as the goods are not “materially different” from the original.
 Because the goods discussed in this section, software, are identical to the trademark owner's goods and the trademark is identical, any use outside the scope of the resale (or redistribution) of authentic (unmodified) goods would be an infringement.  Distribution of modified software requires a license.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:49, 26 March 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	The "Commentary" pages are are explanatory material relevant to those adopting the Model Trademark Guidelines, like Reporter's Notes for a Restatement or advisory committee notes for model laws. They provide information to the end users of the guidelines about the legal, practical and ideological rationale embodied in the guidelines.
		+
		+	If you want to discuss what's on the Commentary page, use the "Discussion" tab for the Commentary page.
		+
	===Commentary on Use for software===		===Commentary on Use for software===

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:44, 26 March 2013
Line 20:		Line 20:

	Because the goods discussed in this section, software, are identical to the trademark owner's goods and the trademark is identical, any use outside the scope of the resale (or redistribution) of authentic (unmodified) goods would be an infringement. Distribution of modified software requires a license.		Because the goods discussed in this section, software, are identical to the trademark owner's goods and the trademark is identical, any use outside the scope of the resale (or redistribution) of authentic (unmodified) goods would be an infringement. Distribution of modified software requires a license.
−
−	~~===Official Branding Flag?===~~
−
−	I wonder if it is good practice to encourage software projects to build their software with a compile-time flag which makes it easy to include or exclude their trademarks? This would then allow the trademark policy to say "we as a project guarantee that if you don't enable this flag, then our trademarked logos and names won't be used in the package in a way which requires permission. And if we accidentally do include a logo in the non-branded version, we won't give you grief about it." That enables people to opt into or out of trademark use easily.
−
−	~~Mozilla software has a "--enable-official-branding" flag (so official branding is disabled by default) although I'm not sure we provide the guarantee in that form.~~
−
−	~~If we do want to encourage this practice, what's the best way to do it? Include sample text in the policy, and encourage projects to alter their software to make the text true?~~
−
−	~~-- [[User:Gerv\|Gerv]] ([[User talk:Gerv\|talk]]) 10:20, 25 March 2013 (EDT)~~
−
−	~~===Media restrictions?===~~
−
−	Is this section intended to restrict distribute only to "optical media, memory stick or download"? That sounds like a paragraph ripe for unintended technological obsolescence :-) There's already rotating magnetic media that you've missed out, and I'm sure people will invent new media forms.
−
−	~~-- [[User:Gerv\|Gerv]] ([[User talk:Gerv\|talk]]) 10:33, 25 March 2013 (EDT)~~
−
−	~~===Porn problem?===~~
−
−	What if a community wants to restrict the logo from being used in pornographic or other themes, skins or personas? Do we provide an option for that? On a more general question, there doesn't seem to be a non-disparagement clause anywhere. Do we intend to have one?
−
−	~~-- [[User:Gerv\|Gerv]] ([[User talk:Gerv\|talk]]) 10:33, 25 March 2013 (EDT)~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:33, 25 March 2013
Line 30:		Line 30:

	-- [[User:Gerv\|Gerv]] ([[User talk:Gerv\|talk]]) 10:20, 25 March 2013 (EDT)		-- [[User:Gerv\|Gerv]] ([[User talk:Gerv\|talk]]) 10:20, 25 March 2013 (EDT)
		+
		+	===Media restrictions?===
		+
		+	Is this section intended to restrict distribute only to "optical media, memory stick or download"? That sounds like a paragraph ripe for unintended technological obsolescence :-) There's already rotating magnetic media that you've missed out, and I'm sure people will invent new media forms.
		+
		+	-- [[User:Gerv\|Gerv]] ([[User talk:Gerv\|talk]]) 10:33, 25 March 2013 (EDT)
		+
		+	===Porn problem?===
		+
		+	What if a community wants to restrict the logo from being used in pornographic or other themes, skins or personas? Do we provide an option for that? On a more general question, there doesn't seem to be a non-disparagement clause anywhere. Do we intend to have one?
		+
		+	-- [[User:Gerv\|Gerv]] ([[User talk:Gerv\|talk]]) 10:33, 25 March 2013 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:20, 25 March 2013
Line 20:		Line 20:

	Because the goods discussed in this section, software, are identical to the trademark owner's goods and the trademark is identical, any use outside the scope of the resale (or redistribution) of authentic (unmodified) goods would be an infringement. Distribution of modified software requires a license.		Because the goods discussed in this section, software, are identical to the trademark owner's goods and the trademark is identical, any use outside the scope of the resale (or redistribution) of authentic (unmodified) goods would be an infringement. Distribution of modified software requires a license.
		+
		+	===Official Branding Flag?===
		+
		+	I wonder if it is good practice to encourage software projects to build their software with a compile-time flag which makes it easy to include or exclude their trademarks? This would then allow the trademark policy to say "we as a project guarantee that if you don't enable this flag, then our trademarked logos and names won't be used in the package in a way which requires permission. And if we accidentally do include a logo in the non-branded version, we won't give you grief about it." That enables people to opt into or out of trademark use easily.
		+
		+	Mozilla software has a "--enable-official-branding" flag (so official branding is disabled by default) although I'm not sure we provide the guarantee in that form.
		+
		+	If we do want to encourage this practice, what's the best way to do it? Include sample text in the policy, and encourage projects to alter their software to make the text true?
		+
		+	-- [[User:Gerv\|Gerv]] ([[User talk:Gerv\|talk]]) 10:20, 25 March 2013 (EDT)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ===Commentary on Use for software===
-These guidelines have taken the view that any modification to the software from that found in the official repository requires a trademark license. Some open source software providers have had their product combined with malicious software, which negatively affects the reputation of the open source project. For this reason, any software that has been modified is considered non-authentic, perhaps counterfeit, software if distributed using the trademark.
+These guidelines have taken the view that any modification to the software from that found in the official repository requires a trademark license. This includes binary code that is created by a third party from source, i.e., that the third-party binary is modified code. Some open source software providers have had their product combined with malicious software, which negatively affects the reputation of the open source project. For this reason, any software is considered non-authentic if the modification is beyond what is permitted in the guidelines.
 ==== Uses for which we are granting a license ====