Gabriele Giacone <[email protected]> writes: > Eion Robb wrote: > > You'll also want to remove the MSN/AIM/etc logos from > > Pidgin/Empathy/etc too, since they obviously fall into the same > > legal grey area. Unless they're considered "fair use" then > > everything should be good to go.
There's no “fair use” in trademark law AFAIK. But the rights reserved to trademark holders are somewhat limited. > I agree. What about MSN butterfly [1], ICQ flower [2], etc ? > > "ICQ, THE FLOWER LOGO, THE ICQ NETWORK and/or other ICQ products > referenced herein are trademarks and/or servicemarks of ICQ. […] No > license is granted to you in this Agreement, either expressly or > implicitly, to use any trademark, servicemark, names, or logos of ICQ, > including ICQ and the flower logo." The question is, does one *need* the trademark holder's permission to use the trademark in this way? I thought using a trademark specifically to *refer to* the product was clearly allowed under trademark law in most jurisdictions. Would someone explain why that's not so? -- \ “I like to skate on the other side of the ice.” —Steven Wright | `\ | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
