In my opinion, disregarding the fact that I am not a lawyer or master of international copyright laws...
No this does not constitute plagiarism. There is an obvious inspiration from the Photoshop splash. Perhaps even the artist started with the Photoshop bitmap, however nothing in that image is a direct copy of the Photoshop splash. Lots of artists inspiration come from other art work (Van Gogh was influenced and almost directly copied Japanese prints) this is no exception. If anything this flatters the Adobe developers. This is frustrating however, the fear created around copyright and trademark law. Originally it existed to protect so that a business/whatever could "brand" itself... Well I'm getting off track. I think this would fall under the trademark laws not copyright. If there were even any plausibility in these claims, certainly the logo could be changed with a new build. So there's not much to worry about I suppose. On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:22:54 +0000, Rick Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I followed a link on nicu's website to a blog: > http://ooo.nicubunu.ro > > ...and found something to think about when accepting a submission to a > FOSS project: > http://ro-ooo.blogspot.com/ > > I don't know how valid this is, but it does look like there is something > behind the allegations. I haven't heard about this anywhere else? > > Maybe its nothing...but recently we were discussing our copyrights and > licensing. > > -- > Regards, > > Rick Barnes > www.nostabo.net > > ******************************************************************* > PRIVILEGED - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL > This electronic mail is solely for the use of the addressee and may > contain information which is confidential or privileged. If you receive > this electronic mail in error, please delete it from your system > immediately and notify the sender by electronic mail or using any of the > contact details noted herein. > > This e-mail sent via Evolution 2.0.4 running on a Linux 2.6.11 kernel. > > > -- Matthew Schultz
