[Brand/IP] Record and accept trademark risk for the SightAdapt name and logo

[KeyffMS]

Decision

The project will continue using SightAdapt and the current eye-based mark under a documented maintainer risk acceptance. No external trademark audit, attorney opinion or certified-register report is required or planned.

The project does not claim that the name or logo is legally cleared, available for registration, conflict-free, protected or non-infringing.

Internal assessment

• no independently indexed exact third-party use of the combined SightAdapt spelling was identified in the reviewed public sources;
• several SightAid / Sight-Aid products and projects operate in related visual-accessibility fields;
• the shared Sight element and overlapping audiences create plausible association/confusion risk;
• the name is suggestive and may provide limited distinctiveness;
• the generated eye logo does not appear to be a direct copy, but the visual concept is crowded;
• overall brand uncertainty is rated medium-high and accepted by KeyffMS / aiteracja.pl.

Acceptance criteria

• Define current territories, channels and product scope.
• Review exact, spaced, hyphenated, phonetic and conceptually similar names in public sources.
• Review public register entry points, stores, repositories, directories and commercial references.
• Record material similar-name findings and limitations of the search.
• Review the current logo for obvious copying and distinctiveness risk.
• Record the maintainer's risk rating and decision to continue using the mark.
• Prohibit claims that the mark is cleared, registered, exclusive or conflict-free.
• Define monitoring and concrete rename triggers.
• Define a fallback naming/migration approach.
• Remove external trademark-audit requirements from the project plan.

Monitoring and rename triggers

Reopen the naming decision if a credible prior-right claim, store rejection, recurring user confusion, materially closer competing product or unacceptable marketing cost appears.

Implementation

• PR Document preliminary trademark clearance decision for SightAdapt #94 created the original public-source review.
• PR Replace external audit gates with maintainer risk decisions #139 reconciled the risk rating, recorded internal acceptance and removed the external-audit dependency.

[KeyffMS]

Preliminary public-source trademark review completed and merged in PR #94.

Decision record:

docs/legal/TRADEMARK-CLEARANCE-2026-07-27.md

Main result:

• no independently indexed exact third-party use of SightAdapt was identified;
• several applications and projects already use SightAid / Sight-Aid for visual-accessibility software and closely related services;
• word-mark confusion/association risk is rated medium-high because of the shared Sight prefix, close assistance/adaptation concept, overlapping users, software goods and distribution channels;
• the current code-generated eye icon does not appear copied, but the eye-on-rounded-square concept is crowded and provides limited distinctiveness;
• recommendation: do not file or materially invest in SightAdapt; professionally clear a more distinctive replacement name before major-store, paid or enterprise launch.

Completed in the issue checklist:

• territories and channels;
• name variants and public-source knockout searches;
• preliminary Nice classes;
• app-store/software/company/public-source review;
• logo-similarity assessment;
• conflicting-use record;
• registration decision;
• fallback naming brief and migration plan;
• public communications restriction.

Still required before closing #88:

• certified official-register searches and a written opinion from a qualified Polish/EU trademark professional.

Merged commit: 417741e27e79d6753a4a3336f3ec56d2b5d7bcdf.

[KeyffMS]

Wynik audytu uzupełniającego — 2026-07-30

Ocena: niespójne i niekompletne; ponownie otwarte.

Opis Issue ocenia praktyczne ryzyko kolizji jako low, natomiast kanoniczny raport docs/legal/TRADEMARK-CLEARANCE-2026-07-27.md ocenia je jako medium-high, zaleca brak istotnej inwestycji w markę i preferuje profesjonalne sprawdzenie bardziej odróżniającej się nazwy przed store’em lub komercjalizacją. Wcześniejszy komentarz wskazywał też, że certyfikowane wyszukiwania i pisemna opinia specjalisty pozostają wymagane przed zamknięciem.

Pozostałe prace

• wskazać jedno kanoniczne stanowisko i ujednolicić opis Issue, raport, checklistę oraz publiczne materiały;
• usunąć lub uzasadnić sprzeczne oceny low i medium-high;
• przeprowadzić profesjonalne wyszukiwanie rejestrów i uzyskać pisemną opinię albo jawnie zmienić target state na wyłącznie preliminary knockout review;
• podjąć udokumentowaną decyzję: dalsze użycie, ograniczone użycie alpha lub rozpoczęcie zmiany nazwy;
• nie oznaczać trademark clearance jako wykonanego bez profesjonalnego wyniku wymaganego przez target state.

Do czasu rozstrzygnięcia kanoniczny raport ryzyka ma pierwszeństwo przed optymistycznym skrótem w opisie Issue.

[KeyffMS]

Triage priority — P0

Reason: the current issue text describes practical collision risk as low, while the canonical trademark report rates it medium-high and recommends clearing a replacement name before major distribution or commercial investment. The prior issue comment also stated that professional official-register review remained required before closure.

Close only when:

• the issue body, report, public brand policy and release gate state one consistent risk decision;
• the professional-clearance requirement and current permitted uses are unambiguous;
• any decision to retain or replace SightAdapt is recorded with the relevant evidence and scope.

Escalation: remains P0 because conflicting public records can directly drive incorrect branding, website and store decisions.

[KeyffMS]

Priority metadata has been persisted as both the title prefix [P0] and label priority:P0, so the priority remains visible on the issue and on Project cards even when the Project priority field is not exposed by the connector.