On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 15:26:27 +0200, Oliver wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sunday 28 March 2004 12:04, Melchior FRANZ wrote: > > > > > I don't care at all for trademarks on our aircrafts. If a trademark > > holder has a problem with free advertisement, he'll tell and we'll > > remove and make sure that his company will *never* again be > > considered for the free sim. > > I don't think that will work that way. :( > Today this works imho this way: > They will admonish you and you will pay and be forced to remove it > otherwhise you will pay a lot more, but you will pay. > > > I know this is very pity and sad but this is the typical way it works > today. :( > You can see this everywhere. ..ahem, that's why we have Groklaw and that nice legal defense fund over at OSDL, you know, to stop crime. ;-) ..one wee part of this is ask, whenever in doubt, a written ok is helpful evidence we _are_ ok, and worst case is they say nay upfront. If they sue, they have to show credible evidence that we caused damages, and that we're outside of the scope of fair use. ..and, face it, having a kanguroo hop around in a mine field with a nice big fat Microsoft Wintendo logo on itself, _is_ fair use. ;-) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
