File talk:RonaldMcDonald-trademarkia-originaltrademark1967.jpg

Explanation of Fair Use of this Ronald McDonald mark
The USPTO itself writes "Records open to the public are searched by users for the purpose of determining ownership for other property rights with respect to patents and trademarks", and encourages the public to access and broadly disseminate such public releases through its bulk downloads and free search information system as implemented on Trademarkia. I can tell you that the display and publishing of these marks along with their USPTO source information identifying them as federally registered U.S. trademarks does not violate intellectual property law. In fact, the main goal of the United States intellectual property system is for the government to exchange limited monopoly rights in exchange for disclosure of intellectual property. The cited U.S. registered trademarks, including this Ronald McDonald logo are self-provided by the respective companies/owners to the United States Patent & Trademark Office for the specific purpose of dissemination and publishing as U.S. federally registered logo trademark interests. The edits and publishing made is consistent with U.S. federal government policy and such use is encouraged to help the public better understand the source of trademark rights. It should be noted that these marks correspond to actual, and documented recordings as registered trademarks at the United States Trademark office, and are not to be confused with other stylistic works of authorship which may embody stylized artistic forms of such logos. Such items may have distinct that copyright interests. However, the published marks on Trademarkia that you challenge are registered U.S. trademarks have been filed to help identify the source of goods and services on which these marks are affixed. Unlike copyright records, for which the U.S. government releases only index information (as opposed to the actual work of authorship), the cited trademark logos are U.S. federally registered trademarks of these respective companies under United States trademark law. The goal of U.S. trademark law is to let the public be aware of trademark rights of owners through the open and free publishing of such logo marks in the public record, and for public dissemination, to help identify the source of a particular type of good or service proffered with such marks. The USPTO itself write "After the information is recorded, the records and associated documents can be inspected by the public and are not confidential, except for documents that are sealed under secrecy orders or related to unpublished patent applications." As such, these marks when placed in context of identifying their corporate source, not only is consistent with United States intellectual property law, but furthers a substantial and legitimate U.S. government interest. It is in the interest of the United States government and the public to provide free and open dissemination and knowledge of trademark rights so as to have a more informed public and to provide clear attribution to the source of goods and services. My Wikipedia edits and posts of these trademarked logos is consistent with and furthers this public policy. These images are fully public when used to identify the source of goods or services as in my Wikipedia edits. Therefore, these logo marks as currently posted should stay, and the legitimacy for the free publishing of these marks when used to identify specific trademark ownership interests in context of company history is indisputable.

Editors are free to use it if used in Wikipedia pages of the owner of the trademark to help the public better understand the ownership rights associated with a U.S. trademark, or the source/origin of a particular good or service. The U.S. trademarked logo should not be used to dilute ownership rights of the trademark owner or to create marketplace confusion by placement on pages not describing the history or legal rights of an owner. --Rabhyanker

Deletion Request

 * Thanks for your response. In fact, I am a U.S. intellectual property attorney and made these posts/edits.  Furthermore, I am a member of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Bar.  The USPTO itself writes "Records open to the public are searched by users for the purpose of determining ownership for other property rights with respect to patents and trademarks", and encourages the public to access and broadly disseminate such public releases through its bulk downloads and free search information system as implemented on Trademarkia.  I can tell you that the display and publishing of these marks along with their USPTO source information identifying them as federally registered U.S. trademarks does not violate intellectual property law.   In fact, the main goal of the United States intellectual property system is for the government to exchange limited monopoly rights in exchange for disclosure of intellectual property.   The cited U.S. registered trademarks, including the Ronald McDonald logo, the Microsoft Logo, the Coca-Cola logo are self-provided by the respective companies/owners to the United States Patent & Trademark Office for the specific purpose of dissemination and publishing as U.S. federally registered logo trademark interests.  The edits and publishing made is consistent with U.S. federal government policy and such use is encouraged to help the public better understand the source of trademark rights.   It should be noted that these marks correspond to actual, and documented recordings as registered trademarks at the United States Trademark office, and are not to be confused with other stylistic works of authorship which may embody stylized artistic forms of such logos.   Such items may have distinct that copyright interests.  However, the published marks on Trademarkia that you challenge are registered U.S. trademarks have been filed to help identify the source of goods and services on which these marks are affixed.  Unlike copyright records, for which the U.S. government releases only index information (as opposed to the actual work of authorship) , the cited trademark logos are U.S. federally registered trademarks of these respective companies under United States trademark law.  The goal of U.S. trademark law is to let the public be aware of trademark rights of owners through the open and free publishing of such logo marks in the public record, and for public dissemination, to help identify the source of a particular type of good or service proffered with such marks. The USPTO itself write "After the information is recorded, the records and associated documents can be inspected by the public and are not confidential, except for documents that are sealed under secrecy orders or related to unpublished patent applications."  As such, these marks when placed in context of identifying their corporate source, not only is consistent with United States intellectual property law, but furthers a substantial and legitimate U.S. government interest.   It is in the interest of the United States government and the public to provide free and open dissemination and knowledge of trademark rights so as to have a more informed public and to provide clear attribution to the source of goods and services.  My Wikipedia edits and posts of these trademarked logos is consistent with and furthers this public policy.  These images are fully public when used to identify the source of goods or services as in my Wikipedia edits.  Therefore, these logo marks as currently posted should stay, and the legitimacy for the free publishing of these marks when used to identify specific trademark ownership interests in context of company history is indisputable.   If you have further comments, do let me know. --Rabhyanker (talk) 07:53, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Crossposted from --Svgalbertian (talk) 22:46, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

lmao TL;DR
 * Not to mention this image is fuckin scary!