Francesco Poli wrote: > On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 20:29:09 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote: > > Your argument is that the trademark holder will win, because the > > licensee exceeded the trademark license. I am afraid someone will > > argue that the copyright license (from the same entity) should count > > for more than the trademark license, and that therefore he should win. > > That is why (I think) the original proposal by Nathanael included the > sentence "but that is not a trademark license and should not be > construed as one". > Does this clarification prevent the misinterpretation you're afraid > about?
Yes, I think so. Sometimes the simplest solution is best. > > On the other hand, someone further down the road may remove the fish > > and recover the swirl-and-bottle, then put that on his own CD-ROMs > > with operating systems, which he then sells. Now what? > > That same person could modify the fish into the logo of Red Hat, Inc., > then put that on his own CD-ROMs with OSes, which he then sells. Now > what? Should we add a restriction to prevent this? And then to prevent > the same with the logo of Sun Microsystems? Of Microsoft Corporation? > Of Adobe Systems Inc.? Of ...? The reason I'm worried is because the copyright holder is the same entity as the trademark holder. That is a special case. If I give you an image and you turn it into a sign that's confusingly similar to Red Hat's logo, you can't argue I gave you permission to do that. But if I *am* Red Hat and let you "do whatever you want", you *can* argue that. > But companies do distribute images, and (only sometimes, sigh!) in a > DFSG-free manner. Their licenses do not usually include a restriction > that prevents the licensee to derive a modified image that is > confusingly similar to the company logo (and then use it in commerce to > cause confusion as to the affiliation, etc.). True. Again, it's a special case. You are giving people the logo and telling them "do whatever you want" under copyright. Is creating a confusingly-similar logo "whatever you want"? > > so my opinion is based on hearsay, but in my opinion > > the last thing you want in a lawsuit is hoping the jury agrees with > > you. > > I'm not sure I follow you here: what do you hope in a lawsuit? That the > jury *disagrees* with you? You hope never to go before a jury at all. Settle if you can, because all bets are off. Arnoud -- Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
