Re: Brand Guidelines Update

[Allan Day <allanpday gmail com>]

On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 22:07 +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi Allan,
> 
> Allan Day wrote:
> > I wasn't aware that the brand guidelines are official or legal
> > documents. They are guidelines. Maybe the foundation should bless them
> > with officialdom... I'm not sure what that would achieve though.
> 
> It's to do with sucky trademark laws. If you trademark something, you
> have to police its use. Branding guidelines outline things that are OK
> and not OK to do with your brand. Therefore, they have the potential to
> weaken your ability to defend the mark later, thus, legal issue. Thus,
> lawyers typically get to look at branding guidelines. Their clients,
> however, are free to ignore that advice in the name of effective graphic
> design.

The question seems to be what the most appropriate place for this
content is. Can the specification of our logo usage sit on the same page
as a potentially looser set of branding guidelines and still perform its
legal function?

Another question: does the specification of how our logo should be used
have to be named 'branding guidelines', or can we move this material to
another page? Could the current content be moved to
http://live.gnome.org/LogoGuidelines, for instance?

'Branding guidelines' does seem to be the appropriate title for the
material I want to produce.

Allan
-- 
Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/
IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org