Difference between revisions of "Commentary:Introduction"

From Model Trademark Guidelines
Jump to: navigation, search
(Add comment on role of Commentary pages)
(Entry of basic info)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Commentary on the Introduction==
+
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.
  
Question: do we have a specific editorial style and/or description for how to use the Commentary pages, vs. the working draft?  I think having a separate "Rationale", i.e. explanation of why we decide to write the policies the way they are, is a critical help to better explain to outside users how OSS trademark policies are expected to work. -ShaneCurcuru
+
If you want to discuss what's on the Commentary page, use the "Discussion" tab for the Commentary page.
  
------
+
==Commentary on the Introduction==
 
 
The explanation was on the Main page, but I'm not sure where to put it so that it's obvious -- maybe at the top of each Commentary page?  This is the explanation:
 
  
"The "Commentary" pages are in their own "Commentary" namespace and are explanatory material relevant to one using the model trademark guidelines, like the Reporter's Notes in a Restatement or advisory committee notes for model laws. They describe things one might consider when adopting the Model Trademark Guidelines and also reflect what choices have been made in the Guidelines and why."
+
The goals of the introduction are to:
  
I also don't know if that explanation is clear to a non-lawyer, who won't be familiar with the advisory materials in restatements and model laws.
+
* Clarify the relationship between open source licenses and trademark licenses;
 +
* Explain the role of trademarks and the policy basis for restricting the use of trademarks;
 +
* Describe scope of the policy, i.e., to clarify what uses the project finds acceptable and unacceptable.
  
Pam
+
The overall philosophy is not restrict the use of trademarks in ways that would not also be considered a trademark infringement.  Therefore, the role of the policy is to define  what the project would consider unlawful uses, but do it in a way that is clearer than what one would find in bare statements of legal doctrine like "you may not use a mark in a way that is confusing."

Latest revision as of 20:26, 31 March 2013

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 the Introduction[edit]

The goals of the introduction are to:

  • Clarify the relationship between open source licenses and trademark licenses;
  • Explain the role of trademarks and the policy basis for restricting the use of trademarks;
  • Describe scope of the policy, i.e., to clarify what uses the project finds acceptable and unacceptable.

The overall philosophy is not restrict the use of trademarks in ways that would not also be considered a trademark infringement. Therefore, the role of the policy is to define what the project would consider unlawful uses, but do it in a way that is clearer than what one would find in bare statements of legal doctrine like "you may not use a mark in a way that is confusing."