Shared publicly  - 
This was a bit silly on our part, sorry. Our trademark guidelines specifically allow satire and critique ('sucks sites') and we should at most have asked him to state that his use of the logo was subject to those guidelines.

Update: Steve George from Canonical had already responded at

We are obliged to have SOME agreement in place with anyone using the Ubuntu logo. Rules for nominative use are subjective and thus a policy and agreements are required if we want Ubuntu to remain a defensible mark. It's a pain but that's the system.

In this case we should just have said 'you may use the mark if you say that you are doing so with permission'. I guess a new guy made a bad call, but that happens and there's no point in beating Canonical up over an inadvertent slip. Thanks to +Jon Masters s for graciously pointing that out.
The first thing I would like to say is my use of the Ubuntu logo and the word “ubuntu” in my domain name falls under nominative use. Although I'm perfectly within my rights to continue using both, I've decided to remove the Ubuntu logo from the website, but add a disclaimer—because it seems like ...
Dave Jones's profile photoJillian C. York's profile photoDaniele Simonetti's profile photoSenthilkumar P's profile photo
Thanks, Mark, for saying, authoritatively, what was on so many of our minds...  Cheers!
Sharing Mark's post will share the original post. Bummer.
Thanks, Mark, for clearing things up.
Good guy Mark. I am happy to read this. And a little prider to be a Ubuntu user since Ubuntu started. Thanks a lot.
+Sergio Schvezov I want to share it publically and have swi tched off the +1 publishing long ago since it massively annoyed my circles. Is there a way to do it for just one post ?
i feel in this case Canonical were correct to assert their trademark rights. "satire and critique" is fine; abuse, half-truths and slander are not, and the latter has regrettably become rather fashionable in certain circles these past few years.

i also own a ubuntu* domain name (, and run a forum with it. i would fully expect the trademark owner to object if i was using that domain to spread slander, lies and half-truths.

i myself also own internationally registered trademarks and i would not accept the kind of nonsense that Canonical has had to put up with from a noisy minority.

oh, and by the way, on the desktop, Unity sucks!
Thank you for admitting this fault, Mark.
Thank you, Mark. No one is happier than I am that this is a misunderstanding.
+Gary Dean That still has nothing to do with copyright though. That's a libel claim which is something totally different.
Mark, thank you. You've at least partially restored my faith in both yourself and Canonical.
Thank you for responding. There has been an inappropriate amount of negativity reacting to this issue, which only makes the critics seem desperate. There's certainly a legitimate conversation to be had around privacy issues in computer software, but claiming that a polite request for compliance with a trademark policy is an attempt to silence critics only hurts the conversation. Hopefully this will result in a positive outcome by exposing the sensitivity of the community surrounding these issues and encouraging productive communication in the future.
Ubuntu has a several  popular fan sites that violate the terms mentioned in that letter. Some of which actually increase the popularity and awareness of Ubuntu and by extension provided a large amount of media coverage for the Ubuntu Edge Campaign.

I doubt it was just one isolated individual that sent the letter to Micah Lee without a few others to verfiy the claim.

Thanks for clearing this whole thing up but the trolls will be out for weeks.
Yes, it was one person just taking what they thought was a routine action. They are new to Canonical and open source, and our policy on this is unusually open minded, and they were not aware of that in this case. I believe it was an accident and it is unlikely to happen again given the publicity ;)
Ubuntu is Linux for human being, and humans make mistakes. It happens, thanks for clearly this up. 
+Mark Shuttleworth, you are a much better person than most to actually step up to the plate and be publicly honest and open with everybody. Most CEOs are too far removed from the rest of the world and wouldn't do that. Most hide behind lawyers and well paid publicists. You are a cut above the rest!

Much respect!
How does the first amendment apply to a company not based in America? Genuine question, I live in the UK so the bill of rights isn't a big deal for us (though, maybe it should be, but that's another kettle of fish).
+Mark Shuttleworth, trademark or not, it's easy to know that it would make waves, it would have been better to send a comprehensive email and ask for removal or that they send a request for a permission to use trademark.

Unity is a good concept but execution is so bad since it hurt how Linux should be and stay.

For Mir, it would need to be on others distributions to be worth it and you could had helped on Wayland instead.

Mostly I moved, I was bored of fighting with your own waste apps, privacy was one nail on the coffin.
+Mark Shuttleworth It's great to see you move art and design into the front seat area with others on the Ubuntu Touch project, but in a recent video the design team it seemed they weren't so happy, and looked controlled.  Are they lacking decision making powers?  Consider how Johnny Ives in Apple and what clout he has.  If you want a strong platform then each leg of the table so to speak needs to have its own integrity.

Brought this up as a sideline since the logo is apart of their art portfolio. 
Some common sense. For once, I am not disappointed.
While this is a good move from Mark it is so only partially. It dose not address why Flee made the website to start with. There is a very real need for an  easy option to opt out upon first install. It's that simple.

On a side note I have mirrored the site several times...

and explain how to do so here...

I thought the last line of my blog post was quite witty +Mark Shuttleworth  
This whole issue made me really uncomfortable. Thanks for clearing this up.
Wow, I didn't expect you to say something like that, I guess I underestimated you. You definitely get points from me for coming clean about this, for what it's worth. It's one thing to make a mistake, but another to go out of your way to stick with it <inserts ramble about republicans, etc />
I just wanna say that the Micah Lee website abuse people of what Unity online search is, according to the smartscope specs. Calling an ad server is wrong and promote the idea that Ubuntu is an adware or a spyware.

Freedom of speech doesn't give the freedom to defame.

It's make very hard for Ubuntu evangelist to explain what smartscopes is in this condition.

I'm totally disagree with Micah Lee website. I prefere explain what smartscope is, how to turn it off or how turn few scopes off, or how to use keywords to bypass smartscopes services.

But it would be great if ubuntu uses the French LoCo "Dash Privacy Interface" that's a disclaimer with an activation possibility for online search, that's run at the first users connexion
+Vincent JOBARD Point taken. There are two opposing views on this. I will admit I fall in with the hard liners who oppose it. Mearly on the grounds it's default with no clear option to remove. Yes ubnutu has a write up on how to disable it but from install there should be something like

"hey this is free. It takes a lot of time from many talented developers to make this OS happen. To try and make a little extra cash we would like you to tick this little box were you can have the added feature of searching amazon from the dash. This info is stored super secretly and we don't cowtow to governments when getting data request. So be a good sport and help us out."

If they had that option I would personally be like "that's cool, ill help out." but instead they force it upone folks.. not cool. 

As far as spyware gos... I am a infosec hobbyist and not an expert admittedly but when i see these words alarm bells go off.

I don't know how that is not spyware. It's a keylogger. that is what it is. So I have to agree with Flee on this one. 
+Mark Shuttleworth you're a famous man.  And considerable part of that fame is "ah, those who announce something and denounce it the next day".

I'm so glad I've seen that plastic conduct attitude back in 2005 and decided not to go with the ancient african Word with strings attached.

Hope you and your project will still learn to both strive and respect others.
+Frank Forrester Plz take a look at the smarscopes spec, and you'll see that Amazon is just a scope. 

The search online option in Unity is just a meta-search engine like Duck duck go for exemple. You can search with it on many sources, desactivate the sources (or scopes) you don't want, and keep the source that does matter for you.

if you're graphist, maybe you wanna open clipart from openclipart or stuff from deviantArt. If you don't have result from Amazon, just desactivate the Amazon scope, or use the "art" keywords. If you're scientist maybe you'll be interested in sciencedirect or scholar scopes.

Micah Lee has never read the specs as I can see with his website. That's a problem. How can he judge and advise people without know what he is talking about.

It's more easly to do Canonical bashing, than read some specs
We apologize you brother, remember we are not the enemy, the enemy is the elite.
+Erik Poupaert i'm not working for Canonical. I just follow Unity from the beginning, participate to the re design discussion about the unified search engine in last december, and i studied the specs to understand what it is and how it works, asked about it to devs from community.

Just because if someone ask me about it during a showroom i wanna give rights answers, not FUD
I didn't get the controversial discussion about this issue until today and I am glad that it has been cleared at the end.
Add a comment...