|
Re: Let's review the FIRST Logo Standards
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tristan Lall
You know, that's a good point—after all, if you look at various FIRST-sanctioned uses of the logo, they don't always respect their own guidelines, indicating that maybe they don't actually care. That is their right, as owners of the logo, but it could be problematic if they were ever in a position to defend that ownership it in court.
|
This is why corporate owners of marks defend them rabidly -- if they ever DIDN'T defend them, they might lose them. This is probably why Hormel asked S.P.A.M. to insert the stupid periods in its name. They (probably) didn't care that a small group of high school students called themselves "Spam," but they couldn't officially say yes without abandoning some rights to their mark. Likewise, when the Navy gave 1294 permission to use the Top Gun mark, they asked us to make a change to it so that it wasn't exactly the same as theirs. If you look closely, the team number is added near the nose of the jet -- changing the mark and relieving the Navy of the responsibility of protecting it. (This was an amazingly nice thing of the Navy to do. Good on them.)
__________________
Exothermic Robotics Club, Venturing Crew 2036
VRC 10A, 10B, 10D, 10Q, 10V, 10X, 10Z, and 575
|