Comments on: Blog: Linden tightens the reins on its brand

By: Ffrederick Effingham

Ffrederick Effingham — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 20:38:37 +0000

Here’s how a proper company handles these things:

http://www.sun.com/policies/trademarks/

The title “Second Life News Center” would be perfectly permissible under rules like these.

By: Ffrederick Effingham

Ffrederick Effingham — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 22:52:24 +0000

I’m sorry, but like all things lawyers tell us we have to do, this is clueless, brainless, and not of the real world. If LL understand the concept that residents will spread the word, because seemingly that’s what they want us to do, how are we to do that without using a logo that actually and clearly identifies SL? The “authorised” logo doesn’t even say “Second Life”, how useless is that?

There is a fine line between allowing residents to display the logo and stopping others from commercially exploiting it, but this smacks of the typical lawyer-like approach of “ban everything” and then nothing can go wrong. Reuters’ use of the logo is a perfect example of a use that ought to be permitted. It would be unreasonable to force Reuters to use that stupid “users” one.

Dilbert would have a field day with this.

Well done pointy-haired lawyer-man…

By: Dexterhaven Rucker

Dexterhaven Rucker — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:29:53 +0000

You may want to consider a community awareness program as it pertains to this initiative. As a SL resident and business owner, my understanding of this change was only triggered through reading a Reuters news HUD.

If there was a pop-up on your sign-in page with this announcement, at least the community at large would be notified to some degree.

Just my two cents…

By: Eric Reuters

Eric Reuters — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:11:10 +0000

@Duranske

Indeed they are Ben.

Thanks for the note.

By: Benjamin Duranske

Benjamin Duranske — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:39:13 +0000

I’m wondering how this will impact Reuters, actually. The banner branding for the “Second Life News Center” seems to violate a handful of the new provisions, including inclusion of a now-unauthorized version of the eye-in-hand logo and the use of the trademarked term “Second Life” in a non-normative, brand-development fashion. Are you considering asking for a written release, or changing the branding? Are your lawyers looking into this?

By: Kerik Rau

Kerik Rau — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:13:35 +0000

In the TOS there is a statement that LL(tm) has the right to list your information in a directory of sorts. My guess is they are going to try and make a pretty directory of businesses to show off to prospective investors.

By: Ken March

Ken March — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:10:46 +0000

It’s good news, right move..

By: Harper Ganesvoort

Harper Ganesvoort — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:04:19 +0000

But what about Resident reaction to the change? Do they understand all the terms and conditions? Has acceptance been high or low? What commentary from them? Your picture here is incomplete.

Suggested, at the least: the relevant article at the official Linden blog.

By: Sigmund Leominster

Sigmund Leominster — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 21:32:49 +0000

Following hot on the proverbial heels of comments about the move to select a new CEO from outside the company, here’s another piece of evidence that Linden Labs is moving to become a more corporate entity. Protection of intellectual property, copyrights, and trademarks is a significant facet of the needs of a growing company.

The next step will probably be an announcement regarding the internal structure of the management team, probably slotting in a new tier of VPs who report directly to the new CEO and take direct reports themselves from smaller units below them.

Just a guess.