Board Decision: Identify Conflict of Interest in trademark usage

Start of voting: 27 March 2026
Voting deadline: 1 April 2026
Decision owner: Rachel Foucard
Decision status: ❌ Rejected, with 3 yes, 2 no and 2 abstains

Attendance and voting

Board Member	Attendance	Vote
Olivier Dobberkau	Asynchronous	❌ No
Stefan Busemann	Asynchronous	❌ No
Boris Hinzer	Asynchronous	⚪ Abstain
Rachel Foucard	Asynchronous	✅ Yes
Martin Helmich	Asynchronous	✅ Yes
Jana Höffner	Asynchronous	✅ Yes
Thomas Maroschik	Asynchronous	⚪ Abstain

Decision description

Facts/Problem

A community member raised the question in an internal channel whether presenting a partner's product under an official TYPO3 domain and branding could create the impression of an official TYPO3 offering. This raised concerns about the separation between TYPO3 GmbH activities and individual company interests, and about a possible impression of preferential treatment.

Objective

The reported conflict of interest must follow the CoI management process as described in our internal documentation: [Internal link to 2023-06-Conflict-of-Interests-Resolution]. It means first, identifying if it is a conflict of interest or not, and if so, which type and severity. This decision paper is covering only these first decisions.

Obligations to cooperate

The Board members have to handle the reported CoI properly. The involved entities and/or persons have to cooperate with the board to provide any needed information.

Financial and human resources impacts

No financial or human resources impact

Resolution/Petitum

The Board must first decide if it is actually a conflict of interest, and if so, which type and severity: For this first step, the Board is asked to decide whether the reported situation concerning the use of the official TYPO3 domain [PRODUCT-DOMAIN] qualifies as a conflict of interest and, if so, how it should be classified in terms of type and severity under the current Conflict of Interest Policy.

    Is it a conflict of interest? 

    Is it in the matrix (2023-06-Conflict of Interest Mapping V2)? 

    And/Or, does a person (with a critical position) involved in this matter have a private interest that is linked to the outcome of the (sensitive) process?

Voting result: 3 yes, 2 no

    If it is a conflict of interest, what type (perceived/potential/real)?

    Perceived: Would a reasonable outsider think private interest might have influenced the official role?

    Potential: Could the person's private interest actually come into conflict with their official responsibilities, even if that has not happened yet?

    Real: Did a person with a relevant private interest actually take part in, influence, or control an official decision or process affecting that interest?

Voting result: 3 perceived, 1 potential, 1 real

And what is the impact severity (low/high)?

Could this conflict reasonably influence an important decision, create unfair advantage, expose the organization to legal/reputational harm, or seriously damage trust?

Voting result: 4 low

The question whether the matter constitutes a conflict of interest did not reach the required majority. The follow-up votes on type and severity are documented for completeness, but have no binding effect.

Discarded alternatives

None

Attachments

...

Comments

Martin Helmich: I rated this as a perceived conflict of interest with low impact severity, because in my opinion it is already well mitigated by the way the partner program works: this form of trademark usage is open to all technology partners, and the entry requirements for that program are documented publicly.