[feature] call out non-confusion

[tieguy]

[Could be interpreted as a substantive policy change, rather than mere clarification. Triage/ignore/close with that in mind.]

The last sentence of Sec. 2.2 makes an important point - your use can't suggest endorsement or affiliation. I think it is worth pulling out from Sec. 2.2 and making clear that it applies to all uses, regardless of notice, trademark symbol, etc. This change suggests language for that point.

I considered adding ", but may not be enough, depending on what situation you're using the mark in" at the end of the second sentence, but I think maybe that obfuscates more than it illuminates so left it out in this pull request.

(Comparatively, I note that the Model Trademark Guidelines leads with non-confusion, and the more I think about it, the more I like that idea, but down that road lies a significant rewrite, which is exactly what I'm trying to avoid here so that you can go ahead and accept my pull requests ;)

[pchestek]

That's the irony, isn't it? The entire effort is to ensure there is no confusion when someone is using your trademark, a symbol whose very purpose is to convey the message that there is some association.

You'll see that the Model Trademark Guidelines don't use the stock language "you cannot suggest sponsorship, endorsement or affiliation" because to me that doesn't provide any illumination on what can or can't be done. The Model Trademark Guidelines instead say you may not "mislead anyone, either directly or by omission, about exactly what they are getting and from whom" to try to explain it in a way that is more helpful.

[tieguy]

Yeah, I liked your language here and considered borrowing it, but figured that made it a harder pull request to accept for Stephen right now :) Regardless of the language used, the first step is to pull it out into a separate section.