Um. Could I suggest splitting this into a "Legalese" section, which has the current boilerplate from IB's lawyer, and an "In practice" section, which explains what that means in English, preferably with examples? Ie. it's OK to link to Wikitravel, use the word "Wikitravel" in your blog or state that Wikitravel sucks. It's OK to sell toilet paper printed with content taken from Wikitravel (since this is fair re-use under CC), but it's not OK to sell it as "Wikitravel toilet paper" (because that implies that IB has something to do with it). More important yet, though, are the borderline cases: can you hand out printouts of Wikitravel content with the "Wikitravel" mark intact? Can you sell the said printouts?
Also, as the Compass Rose logo is Mark's, what are the terms for using that? My mind boggles at the concept of the representation being copyrighted by Mark but the word being copyrighted by IB... Jpatokal 11:05, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
- Mark's talking to IB lawyers about that right now. It's a sticky situation, but we're trying to work out a way that IB can protect its trademark and that we still retain the compass rose logo on the site. --Evan 11:46, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
So, I had this page at Wikitravel:Wikitravel trademark policy to distinguish it from Wikitravel:Trademarks, which is a content guideline. Does the current name clearly distinguish between the two pages? --Evan 12:00, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
- Didn't even realize that page existed! Why not roll them together? Jpatokal 12:28, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
- Because one is specifically about Wikitravel trademark use off and on the site, and the other is about use of other trademarks in the articles. --Evan 12:34, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
- Yabbut the law/logic governing both is still basically the same, and it's easier for users to find and link to if there's only one article covering everything to do with trademarks.
- Then again, we've had this discussion before (cf. Wikitravel:Links to Wikipedia/Wikitravel:Links from Wikipedia), and I continue to think that the distinction between "guideline" and "policy" is so arbitrary as to be useless and that having a thousand small guidepolicyline articles is much worse than having a couple of big ones... Jpatokal 12:52, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
Logo as trademark
The page currently does not address the Wikitravel logo, which is also somebody's trademark (I'm not entirely sure whose). Can I presume it's Allowed(tm) to use the logo too so long as it is for the purpose of identifying or referencing this website and/or to provide a link to this website? Jpatokal 15:11, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
- The original image is licensed under CC-by-SA 1.0. There's a discussion somewhere around here - I'll see if I can find it. -- Sapphire 15:18, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
- The closest discussion I could find on this issue was this one about Mark's copyright on the logo. Obviously no one has yet called a lawyer, but I think that the current sense of things is that IB owns the trademark on "Wikitravel" but Mark has the copyright on the logo, and allows free use of the logo under the terms of the CC-SA license. -- Ryan 15:26, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
- Right here -- Sapphire 15:27, 2 October 2006 (EDT)