← Back to team overview

ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

Re: Addressing the lack of Trademark License for YouTube, Twitter and Facebook Core Apps


On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Alex Chiang <achiang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> * Benjamin Kerensa <bkerensa@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>> We currently are using Trademark brands of Twitter, YouTube and
>> Facebook (and others on Ubuntu.com mobile area) all outside of the
>> scope of each individual services Trademark policy...
> Can you point out where you believe the violation is occurring? I
> looked around http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone for about 10
> minutes and didn't see anything standing out.

Did you not notice the Facebook, Gmail, Twitter, Skype, SoundCloud,
Youtube and Spotify logos (Trademarked Brands) being used? If you read
the policies of these brands they have very clearly outlined that use
on a website or in apps to give a sense of endorsement by those brands
or in some cases at all is not allowed.

Its like slapping to Ubuntu logo on Microsoft.com... Its just not
allowed by the trademark policy because Ubuntu/Canonical does not give
permission to Microsoft to do such because we do not endorse that

> Unless you're talking about something else?
> Rest of my comments follow on the assumption you're talking about
> the web site, and not something else. If it is something else,
> then apologies in advance for not understanding your meaning.

But this also applies to the phone apps which ship again Trademarked
logos/brand names:

We cannot use logos or brand names in violation of the trademark
policies of the respective brands.

>> Don't use Twitter in the name of your website, application or product.
>> - Twitter Trademark Policy
>> https://twitter.com/logo
> We have a twitter logo here:
>         http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone
> But the section you quoted does not apply in this scenario, since
> it is talking about "naming applications, products, or domains";
> simply using the icon is completely fine.

Actually not correct... I know for example that Twitter in the case of
FxOS licensed their trademark because Twitter does not want third
platforms making use of their logo or brand in applications.

You cannot just create a application on a third-party platform and
call it "Twitter" and expect that to be accepted use... Its
common-sense and basic trademark etiquette.

Using the logo

> None of the other sections in Twitter's trademark policy apply
> here either.
>> "You may never use the YouTube logo in conjunction with the overall
>> name or description of your application, product, or service." -
>> YouTube Trademark Policy
>> https://developers.google.com/youtube/branding
> Same comments above apply. The sentence immediately following
> your quoted sentence reads:
>         For example, you cannot call your application "YouTube
>         for Kids" or "YouTube Education." However, you may make
>         reference to the fact that your app is for YouTube or
>         works with YouTube by stating "Great App for YouTube."
> Again, including a YouTube logo is acceptable use.
>> "Avoid using Brand Assets in a way that suggests any type of
>> association or partnership with Facebook, or approval, sponsorship, or
>> endorsement by Facebook." - Facebook Brand Guidelines
>> "Do not use trademarks, logos, or other content that is confusingly
>> similar to the Brand Assets." - Facebook Brand Guidelines
>> https://www.facebook.com/brandpermissions/logos.php
> Same comment applies. Including a Facebook logo on a web page
> does not suggest any association or partnership with Facebook.
> If you're talking about some other url (or something we're
> distributing) please let me know.
> I went through this process for the Vodafone Webbook, and using
> those logos as app launchers is fine too.
> thanks,
> /ac

Benjamin Kerensa
"I am what I am because of who we all are" - Ubuntu

Follow ups