Æthelmearc Letter of Report Æ129
September 4, 2010 (AS 45)

Greetings from Fridrikr Garnet and Alheydis Cornelian,
We would very much like to thank those who commented on this month's letter!
The items accepted on this letter have been forwarded to Laurel for further consideration, where we expect they will be decided on in December 2010.
1: Creature Twyne Dragon - New Badge Accepted
(Fieldless) A fish hook argent
2: Creature Twyne Dragon - New Badge Accepted
(Fieldless) A fish hook sable

On the ILOI, this was erroneously cited as a resubmission. It is, indeed, a new submission. My apologies for the error.
3: Edmund Griffith - New Device Returned
Vairy argent and gules a griffin rampant sable

Conflicts with Alfonso of Castile (January 1973): Or a griffin sergeant sable. 1 CD for the field. Nothing for posture.
4: Gruffud ap Anarawd - New Name Change Accepted as Changed

Originally submitted as Gruffydd ap Anarawd. The submitter allows all changes and requests authenticity to 10th-13th c. Welsh. I have changed the name to an authentic form based on commentary.

In an e-mail to our commentary list, Heather Rose Jones (Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn) wrote "As it happens, the example I found in the chronicles of "1157 Eyn. vab anarawd ap gruffud nei y rys" provides both desired elements in a Welsh-language context in spellings that would still be typical in the 13th century." This page from The Chronicle of Princes (Peniarth MS 20) and can be found at <http://cairsweb.llgc.org.uk/images/byt/byt00176.jpg>. While not extremely clear, the script that Tangwystyl mentions is in the right-hand column, 13th-15th lines.
5: Maeve ni Siurtain - New Badge Accepted
(Fieldless) On a chamfron azure in chief three crescents in pale
6: Marci of Hadley - New Name Accepted & New Device Accepted as redrawn
Argent, a roundel azure within an annulet gules, overall a cross throughout sable

In commentary, the following precedent was brought up:
[Or, a roundel within an annulet sable.] This is returned for obtrusive modernity due to its resemblance to the Target Brands trademark.

Some commenters raised the issue of potential conflict with the trademark for Target Brands. While the most common version of their trademark could be blazoned as Argent, a roundel within an annulet gules, Target has actually trademarked the design we would blazon as (Tinctureless) A roundel within an annulet. When dealing with trademarks there are actually two issues: conflict and obtrusive modernity.

On the matter of conflict, the Administrative Handbook says that we protect Copyrighted Images, Trademarks, Military Insignia, et cetera "when covered by applicable laws and regulations in the country from which the material derives." [Administrative Handbook, III.b.4-5] We are not aware of any pertinent laws by which registration of this badge would infringe on the brand recognizability or business of Target. While Rosa's device would conflict with Target's trademark (having a single CD for tincturelessness of the trademark), the stated uses for Target's trademarks concern very modern goods and services, and do not resemble the uses to which the SCA puts its armory. Therefore we would not protect Target's trademark and this would not be reason for return.

The second issue is possible obtrusive modernity due to resemblance to a real-world trademark per RfS VIII.4.b. This rule forbids "Overt allusions to modern insignia, trademarks or common designs". As noted in the LoAR of April 2002, "As a guideline, there generally will not be an obtrusively modern 'overt' illusion to a logo when the logo uses a single charge, unless the artwork of the submission matches the artwork of the logo very closely, or unless the charge is in some way unique." In this case, the charges are not unique but the combination of the two in this arrangement does provide an overt allusion to the trademark and must therefore be returned. [Rosa Maria di Calabria, 07/05, R-Atenveldt]
We believe that, while the proposed device is quite similar, it is not "overtly allusive" to the Target trademark which is always presented as a rondel within an annulet of the same tincture. Also, the addition of the cross overall further brings Marci's device clear.

The proposed device is also identical to the tricolor roundel of the French Air Force <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Roundel_of_the_French_Air_Force.svg>. This may be a conflict under Administrative Handbook, III.b.5:
5. Military Insignia, Order Badges, etc. - Material such as military insignia, badges associated with awards or honors, and the like may be afforded protection on a case-by-case basis even where this is not required by law. Armory so protected will be listed in the Society Armorial and Ordinary when it is brought to Laurel's attention, but is protected prior to that addition.
We feel that the cross overall brings Marci's device clear of the French Air Force Tri-colored roundel and we are asking Lord Wreath to not protect the French Air Force Tri-colred roundel and permit Marci's device to be registered.

The third issue is the recognizability of the cross-roundel combination. Per RfS VIII.3: "3. Armorial Identifiability. - Elements must be used in a design so as to preserve their individual identifiability." The contrast between the sable cross and the azure roundel is low. However, we feel it is acceptable. We ask Lord Wreath for a ruling.

Her husband, Steffan Úlfkellsson, has provided a Letter of Permission to Conflict with his submitted device (see below).
7: Staffan Úlfkelsson - New Name Changed & New Device Accepted as redrawn
Argent, a roundel azure within an annulet gules

Originally submitted as Steffan Úlfkelsson. It has been change slightly based on evidence from period sources.

In commentary, the following precedent was brought up:
[Or, a roundel within an annulet sable.] This is returned for obtrusive modernity due to its resemblance to the Target Brands trademark.

Some commenters raised the issue of potential conflict with the trademark for Target Brands. While the most common version of their trademark could be blazoned as Argent, a roundel within an annulet gules, Target has actually trademarked the design we would blazon as (Tinctureless) A roundel within an annulet. When dealing with trademarks there are actually two issues: conflict and obtrusive modernity.

On the matter of conflict, the Administrative Handbook says that we protect Copyrighted Images, Trademarks, Military Insignia, et cetera "when covered by applicable laws and regulations in the country from which the material derives." [Administrative Handbook, III.b.4-5] We are not aware of any pertinent laws by which registration of this badge would infringe on the brand recognizability or business of Target. While Rosa's device would conflict with Target's trademark (having a single CD for tincturelessness of the trademark), the stated uses for Target's trademarks concern very modern goods and services, and do not resemble the uses to which the SCA puts its armory. Therefore we would not protect Target's trademark and this would not be reason for return.

The second issue is possible obtrusive modernity due to resemblance to a real-world trademark per RfS VIII.4.b. This rule forbids "Overt allusions to modern insignia, trademarks or common designs". As noted in the LoAR of April 2002, "As a guideline, there generally will not be an obtrusively modern 'overt' illusion to a logo when the logo uses a single charge, unless the artwork of the submission matches the artwork of the logo very closely, or unless the charge is in some way unique." In this case, the charges are not unique but the combination of the two in this arrangement does provide an overt allusion to the
trademark and must therefore be returned. [Rosa Maria di Calabria, 07/05, R-Atenveldt]
We believe that, while the proposed device is quite similar, it is not "overtly allusive" to the Target trademark which is always presented as a rondel within an annulet of the same tincture.

Second, the proposed device is also identical to the tricolor roundel of the French Air Force <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Roundel_of_the_French_Air_Force.svg>. This may be a conflict under Administrative Handbook, III.b.5:
5. Military Insignia, Order Badges, etc. - Material such as military insignia, badges associated with awards or honors, and the like may be afforded protection on a case-by-case basis even where this is not required by law. Armory so protected will be listed in the Society Armorial and Ordinary when it is brought to Laurel's attention, but is protected prior to that addition.
We are asking Lord Wreath to not protect the French Air Force Tri-colred roundel and permit Steffan's device to be registered.

Third, the question of a visual conflict per RfS X.5 was raised with Tryggvi Grabardr Olsen (4/90, Atlantia) - Argent, a hurt within a double-headed serpent in annulo, respectant and looped to base, vert. After viewing both the original emblazon form and the Artemisi Roll of Arms <http://www.artemisiarollofarms.com/individual.php?id=58>, I do not find a visual conflict between the two.

His wife, Marci of Hadley, has provided a Letter of Permission to Conflict with her submitted device (see above).
8: Uilliam mac Cullaich - New Name & New Device Accepted
Per pall inverted argent gules and sable, two bears rampant addorsed sable and argent and an armorer's anvil argent
9: Yamamoto Tokutarou Hikaru - New Name Changed

Originally submitted as Yamamoto no Sadatoro Hikaru. The name has been changed to an authentic form based on commentary. The submitter has agreed to the change.

Tokutarou - Constructed nanori meaning "Righteous first son". Solveig Throndardottir, NCMJ, p. 302, cites Toku "righteous/just" and shows it as a prototheme in Tokushima and Tokugawa. NCMJ, p. 209, cites Tarou "first son."
This concludes our Letter of Report Æ129 dated September 4, 2010.