From the Sometimes You Can’t Catch a Break Dept. DataPortability WorkGroup is a new tech project aiming to allow users to control how their info is distributed through social networks. Released to otherwise positive reviews, the group encountered a major hurdle back in February - a cease and desist letter from Linux developers RedHat regarding the upstart’s logo. RedHat claimed that DataPortability’s infinity design (above left) bore more than a passing likeness to a RedHat trademark (above right), and suggested that the new company stop using it - or else. Typical legal stuff.

Rather than getting into a legal skirmish with the more established RedHat, DataPortability were advised by users and fans to just move on. “Do not spend 0.001% of your mindshare, time, or energy, worrying about a logo! Get a different logo” was one plea. TechCrunch, a popular tech blog, likewise suggested the battle wouldn’t be worth it and that the company simply “have a contest and let fans create a new logo for you”.

And so they did.

Well, that didn’t work out so well either. Selected on April 18, the digital ink wasn’t even dry on the winning contest entry (above left) when DataPortability received yet another cease & desist - this time from entertainment giant Vivendi claiming the second shot at the logo bore an unacceptable likeness to the graphic trademark for their French based file sharing service ZAOZA (above right). And just like the first time DataPortability are moving on to yet another logo attempt. As co-founder Chris Saad is quoted in the TechCrunch piece:

We’re going to speak with our lawyers, tweak it slightly and move on. These C&D tactics are really disappointing and counterproductive. We’d really rather everyone focused on the Technical Best Practice Drafts we released last week.

As much as I might be tempted to launch into another logo contest rant, I don’t think that’s the real issue here. What we can learn from this has more to do with the over-saturation of logos, trademarks and various graphic bits and pieces scattered all over the globe. The corporate landscape is becoming an increasingly cluttered marketplace with everyone and their brother trying to carve out their own brand niche. We can also conclude that the internet’s made it much easier to find supposedly infringing designs, so it’s generally not a good idea to copy anyone (relax - not claiming that happened here). And when it comes to designing a logo, probably worth your while to do a whole bunch of research into who’s already claimed what.

Cause there’s another important lesson here - trademark lawyers have a lot of time on their hands.

Speaking about sinister, over at Art Backwash, illustrative designer Von Glitschka takes a stab at designing a logo for Satan. Lots of branding potential. Established presence. Built-in market. Client brief mercifully short;

A) 666 has to be in the logo.
B) A brand name has to be developed. (Think Zoloft, Viagra or Crestor.)
C) Must use “Red”. (Satan owns this color. Sorry Target and Coke.)
D) No cliches. (Think devil horns and trident)

Price of failure? Well, there’s this whole soul deal…

Sure, you’ll find articles on the interwebs about the best logo. Maybe even the worst logo. But how about the most sinister logo? Only here at The Factor will you find that award, doled out to the Sherwin Williams Paint Company for their Cover the World design (left). Dripping (quite literally) with Spectre like imagery, it’s highly unlikely that such a concept would get off the ground today, let alone become the graphic representation of a major corporation. World domination isn’t exactly the type of theme that big wig companies like to be linked to (even if the plan is - bwahaha - knocked about during board meetings). That kind of stuff is best left to advertising apocalyptic sci-fi movies like War of The Worlds (right) to which the logo bears more than a passing resemblance. Designed by advertising manager George Ford in 1895, the Cover the World design replaced the original Sherman Williams idea - a paint-covered chameleon - and became the company’s trademark in 1905. You can read more about the company, and the genesis of the design at the American Heritage. And yes, the Earth in the logo has been knocked off its axis. Allows the can to pour paint directly onto Cleveland, Ohio - Sherwin Williams’ corporate HQ.

Lot of frothing going on in the design community, revolving around an alleged bit of scumbaggery - The Orphan Works Act - sitting in front of Congress. Summed up - an Orphan Work is to be considered any creative work of art where the artist or copyright owner has lost control of their copyright, by design, passage of adequate time (nothing new), or by lack of proper registration (very new) and when folks who want to use the work haven’t been able to track down the original copyright owner (very, very new). Under international law, copyright protection on a creative work is automatic, and this does seem to be at odds with standing conventions.

I had a skim read of the legal-heavy document and it would seem to suggest that under certain conditions, people can use someone else’s artwork, writing or music without permission. Or more importantly payment. Unless the work is registered with some yet-to-be-built database. Sounding rather draconian, Bill H.R. 5889, as the Orphan Works proposal is formally known, has stirred up a veritable hornet’s nest among creative types. Not surprising really. Award winning animator Mark Simon has a go - quoting such luminaries as Roger Dean (designer of the Yes logo and discussed in our best band logos feature). Dean has this to say about a similar effort across the pond -

This will devastate the livelihood of artists, photographers and designers in a number of ways. That at the behest of a few hugely rich corporations who got rich by selling art that they played no part in the making of, the U.S. and U.K. governments are changing the copyright laws to protect the infringer instead of the creator. This is unjust, culturally destructive and commercial lunacy. This will not just hurt millions of artists around the world.

Pretty heavy stuff. I’ve always been a huge fan of Dean, and I’d generally respect his opinion on anything to do with design. Admittedly I’m not too up on all this, so I’m going to root around the interwebs to see what’s what. I’ve found a load of resources for illustrators and designers that will take a month of Sundays to go through. Most designers, artists and illustrators seem to be falling squarely in the ‘nay’ camp. There’s people who are pro this bill - called themselves Save Orphan Works (the version in front of Congress is apparently a re-boot of an earlier attempt) who describe the new bill thusly;

Orphan works are — broadly speaking — any copyrighted works where the rights holder is hard to find. Because the cost of finding the owner is so high, creators can’t build on orphan works, even when they’d be willing to pay to use them. In many cases the works were abandoned because they no longer produced any income. In most cases, rights holders, once found, are delighted to have their work used.

Hmm. Not liking the sound of this ‘hard to find‘ routine. And because it’s too expensive to find the owner, copyright goes out the window? Not sure I’m hip with the ‘delighted to have their work used‘ deal either. There’s been many a time work from The Logo Factory, has been used without our permission. Delighted isn’t really the term I’d use to describe how we felt. Anyhoo, this Orphan Works plan certainly looks like it needs more investigation before I pull the fire-alarm.

Update: Hopping around a few links and found this. Plagiarism Today has a great form letter that designers opposed to Orphan Works can send their congresscritters. Also explains the rub to the bill in easy to understand language. And here’s a petition. There’s always a petition.

Australia’s Channel 9 news dude talks about the Apple iPhone on the tee vee. Why not, it’s a pretty cool toy. Trouble is, the iphone used in the piece is running Windows XP. Next up - Mac fanboy heads explode all over the outback.

Simultaneous hat tips to Photoshop Disasters and MacTalk Forum.

After spending some time on naming your new company, registering that matching domain name, we’re now ready to get down to business - the point of this entire series - designing a logo. Before we start scribbling away, we’re going to take a look at some things you’ll need to kick around during our upcoming brainstorming sessions. Some ‘rules of logo design’ if you will. By keeping these things in mind, you’ll be able to avoid some serious potentially costly missteps and common design errors. This is not the definitive list of design dos and don’ts - not by a long shot - but by keeping these pointers in mind you stand a decent chance of developing a workable logo on your own.

First, we’re going to talk about things you’re not going to do. Your first inclination may be to reach for some clip art images you’ve got lying around your hard drive, downloadable from some design site, or from one of these do-it-yourself logo generators (LogoYes.com, LogoMaker.com, InstaLogo.com, et al). Just stop right there. You want to design your own logo, not use logo clip art that’s available to anyone with an internet connection. This series is about designing a unique logo, and all of these do-it-yourself solutions are the very antithesis of unique. They may be cheap, but in very real terms you get what you pay for - thirty-nine bucks doesn’t buy a lot of logo. Granted, by designing a logo yourself, you’re paying nothing, but the cost is extracted via the very real effort you have to put into your project. Despite their claims to the contrary, do-it-yourself logo generators are repositories of someone else’s design offcasts, unoriginal in the extreme, and designed to convince you that you’re getting something that you’re not. A decent logo. If you’re only interested in slapping a pretty picture on a business card, and very little else, then stop reading right now and go for it. If you’re interested in developing a company logo that has longevity, originality and portrays your company in a serious light, then cast clip art from your mind and read on. I’ve assembled a series of notes, pinched from our logo design tips section, re-jigged and updated for our do-it-yourself series.

Read the rest of this entry »