[Marketing] A label for Sugar distributions - plan to rework classic "ingredient" branding and include it in our trademark policy
walter.bender at gmail.com
Wed Jan 13 13:47:05 EST 2010
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Sean DALY <sdaly.be at gmail.com> wrote:
> We will soon complete the Sugar Labs trademark policy (draft is here:
> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Governance/Trademark). It's
> been a topic of work and discussion in the past few SLOBs meetings.
The working draft is on the Talk Page:
There are also some draft usage guidelines here:
> The goal of this policy is not just to protect Sugar Labs marks from
> confusion, but to promote Sugar brand awareness. Specifically, to
> avoid confusion over what precisely Sugar Labs and the Sugar on a
> Stick "distribution" are, while encouraging other projects to build
> and develop their own distributions with Sugar, especially liveUSB
> solutions which have the best probability of overcoming the OS
> installation barrier.
> The best way for an alternate self-contained Sugar distribution to
> avoid confusion with Sugar and SoaS is to use a different name. Yet,
> at the same time we need to build the Sugar brand name beyond Sugar
> the project and Sugar on a Stick. And of course we wish to support all
> distributions with Sugar (weak as the distro and desktop brands are).
> How can we do this?
> My idea is to create a label program, licensing our marks. This is
> sometimes called "ingredient marketing", defined as "an ingredient or
> component of a product that has its own brand identity". It's an old
> idea - Ray Dolby did it with sound equipment from the 1970s (1,2);
> Intel had huge success with the "intel inside" marketing campaign
> begun in 1991 (3,4,5). Other examples are TetraPak bricks, Shimano
> bicycle parts, NutraSweet sweeteners, GoreTex fabric, DuPont's Teflon.
> Ray Dolby became fabulously rich with his licensing program. I propose
> we turn the approach inside out and take inspiration from free
> software licensing. With this approach, licensing of Sugar Labs
> trademarks will be free, simple and easy as long as certain conditions
> are respected by the licensee, in particular:
> * Sugar Labs be informed by e-mail to the trademark alias of the
> project's sponsor, URL, contact information, and proposed project name
> (not a name used by Sugar Labs, e.g. "Sugar on a Stick"), with
> positive reply;
> * The project's page not display Sugar marks too prominently, to avoid
> confusion in visitors unaware of the SL site; the project's page links
> to the SL website;
> * SFC/Sugar Labs reserves the right to revoke the license
> * others?
> When would licensing not be routine, i.e. require consideration before
> * project name or logo or URL too close to our marks, risk of confusion
> * insistence on association of another brand with Sugar
> * inclusion of nonfree software with Sugar
> * others?
> What could motivate us to revoke a license?
> * atrocious product quality with no bugfixing
> * abandonment of a project (imagine the horror of a well-referenced
> but old and unmaintained distro)
> * confusing marketing, not respecting the spirit of our license
> * using SL marks in conjunction with other marks in ways which could
> imply SL partnership or endorsement which doesn't exist
> * refusal to comply with Sugar software's licenses (GPL)
> * others?
> Naturally, in the above cases we will want to reflect upon what
> recourse we would have if a licensee started creating problems.
> Intel achieved their fabulous brand awareness (Nr. 23 in the 2009
> Millward Brown Brandz Top 100) mostly due to pharaonic advertising
> spend. We won't have that budget, so we will be inventing cheaper and
> more effective ways of supporting Sugar distributions. I believe a
> label program can help us support a diverse group of Sugar projects,
> growing the Sugar brand and increasing Sugar adoption in schools and
> OK, after objectives, examples, and theory, comes the fun (and
> difficult) part - choosing the label text - our "circled intel inside
> sticker", if you will. I believe the best approach is to communicate
> the *idea* of a remix or a spin, but without using those words (which
> have DJ connotations); one of Sugar's brand values is playfulness, and
> we get to call our remixes something different from everybody else :D.
> So perhaps best to keep the sweet tooth association, such as has
> served us well with ice cream flavors for SoaS versions:
> a sugar treat
> a sugar confection
> a sugar refinement
> a sugar preparation
> a sugar mix
> a sugar concoction
> a sugar recipe
> a sugar formula
> a sugar sprinkling
> a sugar crystal
> Alternatively, a more technical word could work; it might even be
> preferable, so that teachers understand that Sugar is computer
> software, e.g.:
> a sugar construction
> a sugar formation
> a sugar creation
> a sugar variety
> a sugar variation
> a sugar difference
> a sugar combination
> a sugar special
> I use the "a" article to imply there are others; but perhaps someone
> has a different idea?
"xxx sweeted by Sugar"???
> Visually speaking, I would see our logo typeface (VAG Rounded Light)
> with the word "sugar" being one of the random color combinations and
> the other words in grey. The sugar mark will need the (R) of course,
> and if the label is online it should link to the SL site, perhaps even
> a page explaining what "a sugar xxx" is.
> Input greatly appreciated.
> 1. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/journals/njtip/v2/n1/4/
> 2. http://www.dolby.com/professional/technology/licensing/getting-licensed.html
> 3. http://www.intel.com/pressroom/intel_inside.htm
> 4. http://www.intangiblebusiness.com/Brand-Services/Marketing-Services/News/Ingredient-branding-case-study-Intel~466.html
> 5. http://tpmtoday.blogspot.com/2007/04/thoughts-on-ingredient-marketing.html
> Marketing mailing list
> Marketing at lists.sugarlabs.org
More information about the Marketing