[Owasp-board] Brand Usage Guidelines

Jim Manico jim.manico at owasp.org
Thu Mar 24 18:08:16 UTC 2016

As someone who traditionally has been very aggressive about brand usage, 
I agree with Noreen. This is part of the corporate sponsorship where big 
sponsors can use a logo that states "They Support OWASP". If Dr. D is 
concerned with abuse then I suggest we review that on a case be case 
basis. If a vendor is using an OWASP logo or brand to directly imply 
that OWASP supports their product or service (ala 
Aspect/Benchmark/Contrast) then I think we have a responsibility to take 

Dr. D is also a very active multi-year volunteer who has done great 
things for us. Let's make sure we drill down in the abuse case that 
triggered this and look at it closely.


On 3/24/16 3:40 AM, Noreen Whysel wrote:
> Josh,
> We received critical comment from Dirk Wetter, suggesting that 
> allowing members (individual, corporate and sponsors) to display our 
> logo somehow constitutes a "sale" of the logo and should not be 
> permitted. He used as an example a local sponsor of OWASP Germany that 
> included an OWASP logo on their training flyer. The logo included text 
> indicating the are a supporter of OWASP which in my mind makes a clear 
> indication that they support us, not that we endorse the training. 
> However, Dirk feels that our endorsement is implicit in any display of 
> our logo. He goes as far as saying our logo should not be used on 
> partner events and events we are cohosting either, which to me goes 
> too far.
> We need a balance between getting our image and links to our resources 
> out their and protecting it. We could include a rule that says under 
> no circumstances may the OWASP logo be used in advertising, unless it 
> is for a cohosted event or partnership where a signed agreement exists.
> Love to hear your thoughts.
> Noreen Whysel
> Community Manager
> OWASP Foundation
> On Mar 23, 2016, at 4:57 PM, Paul Ritchie <paul.ritchie at owasp.org 
> <mailto:paul.ritchie at owasp.org>> wrote:
>> Hi josh.  The short answer is we have made 2 update to the wiki 
>> guideline language, and Norden has a third update change pending.
>> The red line of that recommended update is on the branding page 
>> 'discussion page'.
>> @Noreen,  please take lead to expand on this short answer, AND take 
>> proactive steps to get community feedback then approval of this next 
>> set of changes.
>> Thanks Paul
>> On Mar 23, 2016 9:04 AM, "Josh Sokol" <josh.sokol at owasp.org 
>> <mailto:josh.sokol at owasp.org>> wrote:
>>     Paul,
>>     It seems that the question of OWASP branding has come up yet
>>     again.  I know that we set you and Noreen off to redefine our
>>     guidelines, possibly with the help of the Mozilla lawyers, but I
>>     haven't heard anything for several months on that.  Would you
>>     mind giving us an update of your progress thus far?  Thank you!
>>     ~josh
>> _______________________________________________
>> Owasp-board mailing list
>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org <mailto:Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20160324/87bf5632/attachment.html>

More information about the Owasp-board mailing list