What is the difference between a logo with a certain "image" and logo with just the name of the company?

Question

What is the difference between a company's logo that has a small picture beside the company's name like that of stackexchange beside which there is a small logo of something like a message icon and a company's logo with just the name of the company without any image beside its name, like for example "SAMSUNG" where is it only the word "SAMSUNG" colored WHITE?

1. Obviously it is easier if I want to create logo to create the latter, just a name with a unique color, but I am not sure if there rules and regulations for what kind of logo to choose?

2. If I choose the second type of logo, should I draw the letters by hand or I can choose any font on Adobe for that?

Answer 1

Some additional things to older answers:

There exists many fonts which are free for personal use, but commercial applications are forbidden or need a special paid license. I have seen even "creating logos with this font is forbidden" in the license text. The copyright owner can decide freely what he allows and what price he demands. Read the license of the font.

It's possible to reserve certain color combination. If you happen to use that color combination to sell something, you can easily get a lawsuit. Big companies such as Coke, Pepsi, Microsoft, Apple etc... have very effective lawyer armies for collecting every penny which can be taken legally.

See this older discussion: Copyright of a set of colors?

The most important thing is "what presents best the business". A slick, unique short name can well be fine as text logo. Others will benefit remarkably if there's an easy to remember, easy to notice, unique and definitely "no unwanted associations awakening" image.

An image which is simple enough can be a valuable also with a slick name. Remember for example "Adidas".

Negotiate with the client and see, what is already done.

Answer 2

Sometimes a logo which is just made of text is called a logotype. It's probably not a good idea to use anything which looks like a competitors logo. As far as rules and regulations go, don't copy another company's logo. That would infringe copyright, or quite possibly infringe a trademark.

Yes, you can use Adobe's Typekite fonts for anything you want, you could also modify the font outlines if you want, or you could even draw your own text.

From the Adobe Typekit font licencing FAQs:

Can I use synced fonts to create a logo or other images?

Yes. You can use the fonts in any desktop program (such as Adobe Photoshop) to create images, which you can then use for any purpose. This includes generating a PDF, EPS file, or bitmapped file such as a JPEG or PNG.

Answer 3

TL;DR: logo with image* is more impressive and as result - memorable.

** precondition* - image must be good, i.e. semantically right, must perform (or carry) abstraction of brand essence.

That's answer to you question in the title. But in the body you are drifting out about easy vs other ways doing design and, seems to me, oversimplifying the logo thing.

Basically there are 7 types of logo, and you can start with Lettermark (or monogram logo) - typography-based logo, but Choosing (or creating) it - tha'ts not easy task as it could look from first sight.

General question is not about logo, but about brand - that means impression, image company creates with his presence, activities in the market. Nad how company sticks to it's brandbook or styleguide.

In general thereare only 2 types of rules (or laws, name how you like it):

1. Natural (granted by nature)
2. Artificial (created by people)

When you try to create branding elements (logo in your case) it's better not to go against those 'rules' ;). Psychological, sociological rules are by nature - you can't change them.

Logo with (good) image is more memorable because of memory features. But the problem is good picture - not easy to adopt/or/design semantically apropriate and graphically simple one.