Namecoin Complete Corporate Identity (Logo Design, etc.)

Swedespade
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 7:11 pm
os: windows

Re: Namecoin Complete Corporate Identity (Logo Design, etc.)

Post by Swedespade »

I vote for Classic.

When can we start using this logo on marketing materials?

kurt
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:13 pm
os: windows

Re: Namecoin Complete Corporate Identity (Logo Design, etc.)

Post by kurt »

So whats the verdict ? which one are we using ?

sudoquai
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 2:48 am
os: linux
Contact:

Re: Namecoin Complete Corporate Identity (Logo Design, etc.)

Post by sudoquai »

@ Swedespade you have another Vote as well :)

@ Kurt be patient. Results will be presented soon.

Phelix has made a good Logo for the N sign - with his permission i would like to combine this with the classic logo as an iteration and stretch the N a little bit wider.

The rest would stay the same, maybe with Namecoin fully written without leading N and color slightly modified to be more blue tone.
NameID: id/sudo.wonder >>> Namecoin @ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/namecoin.org

kurt
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:13 pm
os: windows

Re: Namecoin Complete Corporate Identity (Logo Design, etc.)

Post by kurt »

Will do

DirkK
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:49 pm

Re: Namecoin Complete Corporate Identity (Logo Design, etc.)

Post by DirkK »

The PULSAR design looks fashionable. I think it is forward looking.

Just want to make a comment about "Bitcoin's Better Brother ?" - doesn't ring with me

Thought about the following suggestions:
Namecoin - "Bitcoin's Complement"
Namecoin - "Complementing Bitcoin"
Namecoin - "The DOTbit Domain" or "The dotBIT Domain"

cheers - good work; good luck

John Kenney
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 2:20 pm
os: linux
Location: Sheffield, England
Contact:

Re: Namecoin Complete Corporate Identity (Logo Design, etc.)

Post by John Kenney »

MWD wrote:
pitbull wrote:Just to nitpick a bit - I googled the licensing (I'm not familliar with them) and it seems there is a "Creative Commons: Public domain" http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/. CC3.0 requires attribution. This is the same license bitcoin's logo uses, although I don't see many websites correctly attributing the source.

Edit: Nevermind, I missed the large banner that reads "Creative Commons has retired this legal tool and does not recommend that it be applied to works." Perhaps this is the new licence -> http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

Not sure what is best, anyone else have an opinion on this?
I wouldn't worry about the lack of attribution, becuase the logo says what it is, so it is, in its own way, its own attribution.

My opinion is that public domain is not as good of a choice as CC Attribution license, because Public Domain relinquishes ALL rights, CC Attribution reserves some, for instance the legal right to demand someone not use it in a misleading manner. That's useful in case someone makes Namecoin-brand spy software or something. (That would also get into trademark issues, but having some protections on the image could help with getting someone to stop that.)

CC IS copyright, with less restrictions. Public Domain is no copyright, i.e. "I release thee to the wind."

When you all are ready to decide and release a new one, let me know, I'll ask a friend who is an intellectual property attorney, and he's also a friend of Namecoin. (He donated to the FreeSpeechMe campaign.)

Ya'll should also ask me to ask him when you're ready to release the new wallet. It's under the GNU 2 license, it may not be the best idea to automatically just update to the latest, GNU 3. The 3 license has more restrictions, especially on what kind of hardware things can run on, and that could actually discourage adoption. But we should ask the lawyer. But I don't want to bug him until there's an actual need. I have limited favors with him, and I don't want to ask him to do free work until its needed.

MWD
There are already 'passing-off' laws in most jurisdictions I think, which could be used to prevent that type of thing (I'm not a lawyer, ask your friend). I'm not sure copyright law would be used in that way, it's getting more into trademarks, names & passing off laws.

If it is copyrighted then you also have the problem of who owns the copyright, either set up a foundation to own all the copyrights, employ lawyers, etc, or every contributor keeps their own copyrights (can get very messy). GPL 3 also fixes some problems with GPL 2, there's a bad clause in GPL 2 (clause 4), when everybody owns their own copyrights, if it's a large project (or becomes one) & some contributors die or become hard to contact then anybody who violates the licence once loses all rights to modify/redistribute it. You're also stuck with GPL 2 or later (if that was added) unless all contributors can agree.

I like the pulsar design & classic, but classic has that little used unicode symbol, which is important for when people don't want to use the full logo, ℕ.

So I want to give 2 votes to classic, I think having that unicode symbol is important, if it's not allowed to vote for the same one twice then I'll take pulsar too.

sudoquai
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 2:48 am
os: linux
Contact:

Re: Namecoin Complete Corporate Identity (Logo Design, etc.)

Post by sudoquai »

John Kenney wrote:
MWD wrote:
pitbull wrote:Just to nitpick a bit - I googled the licensing (I'm not familliar with them) and it seems there is a "Creative Commons: Public domain" http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/. CC3.0 requires attribution. This is the same license bitcoin's logo uses, although I don't see many websites correctly attributing the source.

Edit: Nevermind, I missed the large banner that reads "Creative Commons has retired this legal tool and does not recommend that it be applied to works." Perhaps this is the new licence -> http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

Not sure what is best, anyone else have an opinion on this?
I wouldn't worry about the lack of attribution, becuase the logo says what it is, so it is, in its own way, its own attribution.

My opinion is that public domain is not as good of a choice as CC Attribution license, because Public Domain relinquishes ALL rights, CC Attribution reserves some, for instance the legal right to demand someone not use it in a misleading manner. That's useful in case someone makes Namecoin-brand spy software or something. (That would also get into trademark issues, but having some protections on the image could help with getting someone to stop that.)

CC IS copyright, with less restrictions. Public Domain is no copyright, i.e. "I release thee to the wind."

When you all are ready to decide and release a new one, let me know, I'll ask a friend who is an intellectual property attorney, and he's also a friend of Namecoin. (He donated to the FreeSpeechMe campaign.)

Ya'll should also ask me to ask him when you're ready to release the new wallet. It's under the GNU 2 license, it may not be the best idea to automatically just update to the latest, GNU 3. The 3 license has more restrictions, especially on what kind of hardware things can run on, and that could actually discourage adoption. But we should ask the lawyer. But I don't want to bug him until there's an actual need. I have limited favors with him, and I don't want to ask him to do free work until its needed.

MWD
There are already 'passing-off' laws in most jurisdictions I think, which could be used to prevent that type of thing (I'm not a lawyer, ask your friend). I'm not sure copyright law would be used in that way, it's getting more into trademarks, names & passing off laws.

If it is copyrighted then you also have the problem of who owns the copyright, either set up a foundation to own all the copyrights, employ lawyers, etc, or every contributor keeps their own copyrights (can get very messy). GPL 3 also fixes some problems with GPL 2, there's a bad clause in GPL 2 (clause 4), when everybody owns their own copyrights, if it's a large project (or becomes one) & some contributors die or become hard to contact then anybody who violates the licence once loses all rights to modify/redistribute it. You're also stuck with GPL 2 or later (if that was added) unless all contributors can agree.

I like the pulsar design & classic, but classic has that little used unicode symbol, which is important for when people don't want to use the full logo, ℕ.

So I want to give 2 votes to classic, I think having that unicode symbol is important, if it's not allowed to vote for the same one twice then I'll take pulsar too.
Thx John for your vote. The classic has the big Advantage that the Unicode is included. And 2 Votes for the same is possible, why not :)

The finished work will be made available under the Creative Commons CC Zero license.

Image
Last edited by sudoquai on Mon Apr 21, 2014 3:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
NameID: id/sudo.wonder >>> Namecoin @ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/namecoin.org

sudoquai
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 2:48 am
os: linux
Contact:

Re: Namecoin Complete Corporate Identity (Logo Design, etc.)

Post by sudoquai »

DirkK wrote:The PULSAR design looks fashionable. I think it is forward looking.

Just want to make a comment about "Bitcoin's Better Brother ?" - doesn't ring with me

Thought about the following suggestions:
Namecoin - "Bitcoin's Complement"
Namecoin - "Complementing Bitcoin"
Namecoin - "The DOTbit Domain" or "The dotBIT Domain"

cheers - good work; good luck
Good suggestion with the Slogans. It was only an idea and i think we can discuss about the Slogans as well in a seperate thread. Would you like to vote for an other Logo version as well ?

The intention at making the "Pulsar" version was, to visualize a "Name". So it is looks like a handwritten Letter N.
NameID: id/sudo.wonder >>> Namecoin @ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/namecoin.org

Post Reply