I have a few comments/questions on the Mozilla™ Trademark Policy.

  1. To clearly show where and when ™ and ® have to be used, I think the Policy itself should have inserted those chars where needed.
  2. Why isn't XBL a trademark? Because of the current W3C CSS-SVG joint work?
  3. I deeply regret the contents of the "Related Software" section, and I think it goes too far. I see no harm in "Firefrobnicator" or "Frobnifox". So everyone understands that it is something for Firefox™. So what? It's not called "FireFrobnicatorFox" nor "Firefoxfrobnicator"... Let's imagine an extension called "Fireworks" because it deals with the colormap or a theme called "Fireworks" because it's an explosion of colors, a DHTML game designed for Firefox™ because of his excellent JS/DOM support and called "Firefighters". Is the Mozilla Foundation really going to complain about that? Don't get me wrong, I am not playing the devil's advocate here. I am really concerned for an extension I am currently working on.
  4. The item above, in conjunction with the "Domain names" section leads to the following question: what about a firefrobnicator.com domain proposing services and code (extensions and themes for example) for Firefox™?
  5. I would have loved to see the "Linking" section say that a link is a reference to a web address reachable by anyone and linking to such an address is absolutely free. Of course, if the textual content in the link is a trademark, the policy has to be followed for the text. But I don't think there is anything the Mozilla Foundation should say about this link (be very careful reading the URL, there is only one "l"). I am not responsible for the target web site.
  6. This is a 1.0 Policy. Will future changes be retroactive? I mean are future changes expected to apply to services/sites/printed materials/etc already existing at the release time of the changes? How (I really mean how: delay, process, etc.) does the Mozilla Foundation expect people to make existing material meet the new Policy when it is released?
  7. the Trademark FAQ says "the inclusion of Mozilla browser windows in screenshots of other web sites for non-commercial uses such as web site reviews". But a web site proposing a commercial extension for Firefox™ will absolutely need such screenshots if the extension does not stand in separate windows/dialogs/panels. For example an extension adding something to the main toolbar of Firefox™. I think that the policy goes, again, too far here.

Mozilla and Firefox are trademarks of the Mozilla Foundation.