Am Sonntag, 27. Februar 2011, um 16:23:47 schrieb Peter Brown: > On Feb 27, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Oliver Fels wrote:
> No, not in your twisted logic. FG is not creating income based upon others > work. FG is representing the environment and aircraft created in a > realistic manner. A proper analogy would be for FPS to sell the > "associated" livery for a profit. Which if you hadn't brought this up > would have been the case. …not a bad idea. FlightGear is distributing trademarked items by providing all means of infrastructure to do so - multiplayer servers, download facilities (web server, GIT server, scenery database, etc.) and spreads them into the world. >From a legal standpoint there is no denying that at least the owners of the aforementioned distribution channels are violating trademarking rights. With the full knowledge of the infringement now. The trademark owner has the full right to define who does what with his items and trying to hide the violation from him is in no way better as if FlightProSim is trying to hide that they are violating the aircraft owners rights. It is not a question of commercial or not but a question whether people stick to the values and borders defined by legislation. And of personal moral. Oliver ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Free Software Download: Index, Search & Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
