A couple of points:
There are around 1800 registered trademarks that use the name
Kodiak. There are many companies that use the same name for trademarks without any issues. Even the use of the same letter style by two logos may be a non-issue. Trademark law is not designed to prevent "copying," but to prevent confusion in the marketplace. What are the odds that consumers will confuse a landscaping company with a smokeless tobacco brand, even if the logo designs are similar?
AI-generated artwork is not protected by copyright at this point in time. Artwork must have a human creator to qualify for copyright protection. Of course, legislation , as well as case law, could rapidly change this.
Most logo designs (in the US) do not qualify for copyright protection, anyway. Most trademarks consist of mere lettering, or lettering together with common shapes, neither of which is copyrightable. This has long been the stand of the US Congress and the US Copyright Office.
What about trademark protection? There is practically no limit to what can function as a trademark and receive trademark protection. Even individual letters of the apphabet have had hundreds of trademark registrations.
A logo does not need to depict what a company does for a living. It does not need to "tell a story" or even "mean" anything. This is a widespread misconception. Kodiak does not convey the idea of landscaping any more than it conveys the idea of smokeless tobacco. But this is a non-problem. As Michael Bierut, of Pentagram, once said,
"people forget that a brand new logo seldom means a thing. It is an empty vessel awaiting the meaning that will be poured into it by history and experience. The best thing a designer can do is make that vessel the right shape for what it’s going to hold."
Paul Rand, considered by many to be the father of modern logo design, made these comments,
“A logo is a flag, a signature, an escutcheon, a street sign. A logo does not sell (directly); it identifies. A logo is rarely a description of a business.”
"It is only by association with a product, a service, a business, or a corporation that a logo takes on any real meaning. It derives its meaning and usefulness from the quality of that which it symbolizes. If a company is second rate, the logo will eventually be perceived as second rate. It is foolhardy to believe that a logo will do its job immediately, before an audience has been properly conditioned.”
"Ultimately, the only mandate in the design of logos, it seems, is that they be distinctive, memorable, and clear.”
What is required of a logo design? Its purpose is not to explain, but to identify.
It should be clear and memorable. Easily recognizable.
Does it need to be simple? Not necessarily. Simplicity is not a requirement for a logo, though many good logos are simple. Paul Rand's logo designs were mostly simple. But there have been complex logo designs that have been successful. Still, a logo that includes gradients, bevels, outlines, highlights and other tricks, is naturally going to self-limiting in its end uses. A logo may need to be cut out of thick aluminum, carved in wood, embossed, embroidered, or printed on bags in single color. A logo with lots of complexities may make some of these things difficult or very expensive. A logo design with lots of visual tricks should be accompanied by an alternate design that is "dumbed down" for uses where the complicated one will just add unnecessary expense.
Many clients do not understand this.
Does a logo need to be clever or highly creative? No. And honestly, these terms may not be highly meaningful. Two different people may differ in their opinion as to what is creative or clever.
At any rate, was the Nike swoosh a product of design genius? Of course not. If it were designed today it would likely be ridiculed as simplistic or lacking in creativity. Its designer did not base the logo on Greek mythology as many believe. That story was an "after story." The name
Nike had not even been settled on yet. She was told to make a logo that "conveyed motion." And that's what she did.
Logo design is, to a great extent, subjective. Ten different good designers may come up with ten completely different solutions to the same design problem—and they may all be good, though they may criticize each other's concepts.
When the Chase Bank logo was first presented to bank executives, some of them hated it. Why? "It doesn't mean anything!" one of them complained. Yet it has been successful for sixty years.
What was the the secret to its success? Design genius? No.
It has been successful for the same reasons that the Nike swoosh has been successful—it represented a quality product (or, at least, one of perceived quality), and it was then relentlessly and aggressively marketed.
Brad in Kansas City