ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: Addressing the lack of Trademark License for YouTube, Twitter and Facebook Core Apps
Ricardo Salveti de Araujo <ricardo.salveti@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Mon, 18 Mar 2013 19:47:07 -0300
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130311 Thunderbird/17.0.4
On 03/18/2013 07:31 PM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
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
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
We have a twitter logo here:
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.
One thing is that we're not creating an application here, it's just a
browser opening a link.
So, I'd follow Alex's line here, that using just the logo without
modifying the app/user experience is actually fine.
But for an official statement we'd need a lawyer here.
Ricardo Salveti de Araujo