[Marketing-Public]more re: mozilla redistribution and trademarks

Duane Fahey dfahey at visualautomation.com
Mon, 29 Sep 2003 10:55:01 -0400

I'm not a big Linux guy, but this seems to differ from what they are doing.

Basically, in the Linux world, anyone can make any kind of penguin, and 
then the user knows that "it's something about Linux".  Is that right?  
I'm not sure about this, just asking.

Then, Red Hat or Suse or whomever, as a distributor, has their own logo.

With the Mozilla Foundation, things seems to be different.  The Mozilla 
Foundation is selling CDs, answering tech support calls, etc.  There is 
no equivalent to this in the Linux world, correct?  Distributors do 
that, but not there is not a core Linux group that does anything other 
than coding, right?

So, the Mozilla Foundation will sort of be competing with a distributor, 
in a way.

My point is that the Mozilla Foundation does need something to clarify 
to the user that something came directly from them, but it also needs a 
really nice generic logo that EVERYONE can use for anything.  A logo 
that tells people "Mozilla" the way that the penguin says "Linux".

But now, you have 2 or more brands.  Much harder than one.  Building one 
brand is the easiest way to go here.

Ideally, you want every single thing that anyone does to have this brand 
on it.  Every web page that refers to Mozilla, every add-on, every 
theme, every press release, and every distribution should have the same 

At least, this is what I think...  - Duane

Bart Decrem wrote:

> No sooner was the ink dry on my last mail, then I came across a 
> request from a group that's friendly to Mozilla, wants to sell Mozilla 
> CDs in a specific region and would like to donate part of the proceeds 
> to the Mozilla Foundation.
> But they'd like to be able to use our lizard icon and text logo, so 
> are asking for permission.
> And they'd like to include a piece of Mozilla merchandise with their CDs.
> So this means I need to detail point 8 from my previous mail more.
> It seems to me that we need to have *some* way of signalling to the 
> world that something is "official" and comes from the "real" Mozilla 
> organization.  Since the MPL allows people to redistributeour code, 
> and my previous proposal allows people to market redistributed 
> products as "Mozilla", the only thing we have left are those 2 pieces 
> of art (the lizard, the text logo).  So I'm inclined to say "Only 
> Mozilla.org can use those marks".  And Mozilla.org would include 
> official projects such as localization and agents such as E-Flo (our 
> official CD distributors).  But the rest of our extended community 
> would NOT be able to use those marks.  Note that, for instance, 
> neither Mozillazine nor Mozillanews nor Mozdev use our text logo, and 
> only Mozdev uses parts of our lizard logo (so if we adopt that policy, 
> we'd ask Mozdev to redo their banner).
> We could create a second set of artwork (perhaps a different color 
> scheme or a slightly different style) that we do license to our 
> "community"  - so that could include Mozdev, Mozillazine, these CD 
> folks etc.
> Thoughts?
> Bart
> _______________________________________________
> marketing-public mailing list
> marketing-public@mozilla.org
> http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/marketing-public

Duane Fahey
Visual Automation, Inc.
517.622.1850  517.622.1761 fax
Secure Desktop | iLock | ColdKey | iLockNess | ePortal.com