Or maybe they paid 100K for branding 
Make sense?
Yes. I wrote an article about this very thing here: Brand Update #7: The Color Scheme and Strategy Behind Symbol
2 Likes
We own the trademark for Symbol and also Symbl in Japan.
Catapult had 44 conflicts around trademarks in tech so it was not possible for us to use that name.
3 Likes
Can you share more why you think this? Extensive research was done looking at top brands in tech and blockchain. This was strategically crafted to be competitive and resonate with enterprise and enterprise leaders were interviewed on the brand. Not sure I understand the “generic” feedback.
3 Likes
I actually pulled this image up during a brand meeting. I shared feedback on old logo variations (after talking with Mixmaster, Brain, Makoto and Jeff) and the Brand Steering Committee looked at various ways to honor the community in the logo. We ultimately chose the Fibonacci method as a nod to the past while looking toward the future. There were other logos and hundreds of names explored. We liked this one best and could own the trademarks.
3 Likes
I disagree. The visual competitor audit the agency shared shows NEM’s color scheme is not as competitive in this space. Brand Update #7: The Color Scheme and Strategy Behind Symbol
3 Likes
Brand Update #7: The Color Scheme and Strategy Behind Symbol The current NEM color scheme did not rank high in the competitor audit and the decision to have new color identity was to have an edge when it comes to visual identity and memory recall.
3 Likes
Individuals or businesses want (and should) register their trademark to protect their intellectual property. However, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) views the primary purpose of trademark law as preventing customer confusion among product or service offerings.
2 Likes
Foundation arranged for NEM Holdings to own it and Foundation paid for trademarks and brand agency/legal to secure all trademarks.
4 Likes
Yes, we need a trademark. Especially as we build out more global supporting products for the platform and explore new sources of revenue (example = licensing).
3 Likes
Who is “We”?
Foundation arranged for NEM Holdings to own it and Foundation paid for trademarks and brand agency/legal to secure all trademarks.
2 Likes
I understand. Thank you
2 Likes
Thank you 
2 Likes
This may help too.
3 Likes
On request of devs, I invented the name “Catapult” for our community and over the years I have really loved it.
But I like model 1 more. It allows for more “NEM” products in the future.
I think “Catapult” can stay a reference to the engine and technology but Symbol be the brand that holds the Catapult engine.
I like the engine for NEM1 being NIS1 and the engine for Symbol being Catapult. But they all are still “From NEM”.
7 Likes
I wasnt sure what to think at first, but grew on me pretty fast, dropping the “O” from symbol actually makes it look even more appealing and transforms a common word into something completley new and distinguishable.
What comes to my mind with the word symbol is anything to do with cryptography, hence security, and a certain amount of mystery too. Then think of the Rosetta stone, Egyptian hieroglyphs etc, all are “symbols” that have significant meaning but needed the “key” aka Rosetta stone to decipher them.
Much more comes to mind too, but thats my 2 cents.
3 Likes
It does stand out without the “O”. I like both spellings though. Curious to hear more on this from others. I put a poll up on Twitter on this too. 
https://twitter.com/Inside_NEM/status/1208191808032915457
https://twitter.com/Inside_NEM/status/1208191808032915457
3 Likes
Even-though its a design placement…I wish we can and do a SYMBOL CON like Google IO 
1 Like