In previous presentations and postings, I've mentioned the fact that governments invest in the creation of intangible assets -- including brands and logos (trademarks). But government logos are a special case of trademarks which are given a higher level of protection. Chapter 33 of Title 18 of the US Code protects government emblems, insignia and names. This runs from use of "Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation" to the FBI to Smokey the Bear.
The purpose of these laws is to prevent abuse and deceptive practices. No one wants the public to think a private bank with the words "Federal Reserve" in the name is really one of the Fed banks. Likewise, the use of the Presidential seal such be reserved for the use of the President (something candidate Obama found out quickly when his campaign once used a look-alike Presidential seal during a speech).
The laws, however, also allow the agencies to control commercial use of the logos and license them out. For example, various White House and Secret Service logos are licensed to the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division Benefits Fund. Licensed products are sold in the official (or licensed) gift shops. Similarly, the FBI Recreation Association sells official FBI items at gift stores in Washington and at field offices.
Every once and awhile, government agencies feel the need to warn someone about the use of the logo. The latest occurred last week when the FBI sent a letter to Wikipedia stating that the use of the FBI logo in the Wikipedia article on the agency violated the law. Wikipedia responded in a letter stating that the Bureau had overstated the case -- claiming that Wikipedia's use of the seal did not constitute assertion of authority or intent to deceive. Nor does the posting violate commercial use. (See also New York Times story).
The Wikipedia letter noted that they are willing to fight out the issue in court. No word yet as to whether the FBI is willing to pursue the matter. In either case, the exchange is may be important step in clarifying the protection granted to government logos. It may also force the government to take a closer look at how it manages its brands -- and other intangible assets.
As I've noted many time before, the US government invests significant funds in the creation of intangible assets -- both those used by the general public (education; R&D) and those held by the government (brands). We need to better understand those investments (with a better budget analysis) and management them.
Leave a comment