Jon, MSF probably, X-Plane, possibly, I don't know.
As I research this matter further, I think we have gotten ourselves unnecessarily wound up about trademarks. At least in UK law. When a trademark is registered here in the UK, the company declares in which business it trades within classes. For example, Red Bull declares all sorts of things, but NOT computer games: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/ohim?ohimnum=E698506 This is the official UK government site, so I think we can take that as good evidence. UK law conforms to European and International standards: the classes are set by international agreement. I would expect US law to be very similar. If we think of ourselves as a computer game, I don't think we are liable to any action by Red Bull, or pretty much anyone else on _trademark_ grounds. If on the other hand we believe that we are a software flight simulator, then we are getting closer to, for example, Boeing business activities. Copyright, hmm ..., the laws on copyright are draconian. That's hornets nest that I'm not going to poke with a stick. Vivian > -----Original Message----- > From: S. Berndt [mailto:jonsber...@comcast.net] > Sent: 04 March 2011 12:29 > To: vivian.mea...@lineone.net; FlightGear developers discussions > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Logos and licensing > > I suspect that msfs and xplane have licensing agreements with trademark > holders. It would of course be good to know this! > > Jon > > > Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on AT&T > > Vivian Meazza <vivian.mea...@lineone.net> wrote: > > >Chris > > > >> On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 09:43 +0000, Vivian Meazza wrote: > >> > I'm going to set you all a simple multiple choice test - pay > attention > >> > because I'm only going to say this once: > >> > >> Okay, now it's my turn. Please answer the following: > >> > >> 1. Is there a difference between a trademark and a copyright? > >> > >> A. Yes > >> B. No > >> C. It doesn't matter because we should be able to ignore either of > them > >> and include well-known logos on aircraft liveries if we want. > > > >A. There is a very great difference, at least in the UK. In turns out > that > >Trademark protection is really quite limited. For example, the Cessna > >trademark (word and logo) is registered only in Class 12. We would be > able > >to use Cessna in Class 9. Just like Polo (a sweet) and Polo (a car). > > > >Copyright of the logo - different question. "Well known" or not doesn't > >change the equation. > > > >Interestingly, Red Bull was once refused an injunction in the US against > a > >fizzy drinks company marketing a drink called Bullshit. > > > >http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room/room/view_article.asp?name=../articl > es/ > >Red Bull Trade Mark is Bullshit.htm > > > >Which made me smile (yes, I'm easily amused) and perhaps sums up Red > Bull's > >corporate behavior pretty well IMO. > > > >> 2. Another flight simulator (X-Plane, MSFS, whatever) includes > >> trademarks in their liveries. Therefore... > >> > >> A. It must be okay to do this because *they* do it. > >> B. Even if it's not okay, we can do it because *they* do it. > >> C. It really doesn't matter what they do. What matters is what *we* > >> do. > > > >A and B. Precedent is important. If Company A does not pursue Company B > for > >unlicenced use of their trademark or copyright then it is reasonable to > >assume: > > > > a. Company A doesn't care about such unlicenced use, or indeed might > >see it as free advertising > >Or b. Company B is not, in fact, infringing that trademark (see Cessna > >above) > > > >If we are in exactly the same business or class as Company B and we are > sure > >that the use is in fact unlicensed, it is also reasonable to assume that > we > >will get the same treatment. > > > >> 3. Scenario: It's against the law to drive 60 mph (100 kph) in a 30 > >> mph (50 kph) zone. I drive 60 mph in a 30 mph zone but I always: (a) > >> make sure there are no police around, and (b) don't ask the police if I > >> can do this. Which of the following statements is true? > >> > >> A. It's only wrong to drive 60 mph in a 30 mph zone if you hit > >> something or run over somebody. > >> B. Because I didn't ask permission (and so I couldn't be told I > >> couldn't do it) and because no police are around, it is now okay to > >> drive 60 mph in a 30 mph zone. > >> C. No matter what, it's wrong to drive 60 mph in a 30 mph zone. > > > >D. It is however tacitly accepted that it is OK to drive at an _indicted_ > 79 > >mph on UK motorways (the unwritten 10% + 2 rule). Same as the answer > above. > > > >> 3. Scenario: The FlightGear Project decides they will only distribute > >> aircraft with liveries containing trademark icons if the trademark > owner > >> grants permission. This means there are very few liveries containing > >> trademarks in the distribution package. However, anyone wanting to > have > >> liveries with trademarks can easily obtain them by Googling "flightgear > >> liveries" and then going to a multitude of independent sites that have > >> livery repositories. Which of the following statements is true? > >> > >> A. That will spell the end of the FlightGear Project > >> B. That would work > >> > > > >So we would have to ask our users to add dodgy liveries to our AI > aircraft? > >If they are classed as "FlightGear Liveries", and we take no steps to > object > >to other websites use of our name/logo, could we not also be guilty of a > >infringement of the law by association? I don't know, I haven't > researched > >it, but shoveling a problem around is not solving it. It would certainly > >lead to fragmentation of the project, but I think that's already > happening > >to a certain extent. Not really a good idea. > > > >Personally, I don't care if I never see another airliner in FG, but there > >are others who do. > > > >Hmm, all thought provoking, and stimulated more research, > > > >Thanks, Chris > > > >Vivian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- > >What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You > >This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details > >its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative > >solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d > >_______________________________________________ > >Flightgear-devel mailing list > >Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You > This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details > its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative > solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
