Syd wrote
> > But definitely: The designer should take the risk for it - and if too
> > young: The parents should support it - that is standard in any legal
> > business matter for youngsters!
>
> I agree here ... being mainly a 'content creator' , I think I'm
> responsible for content I create , and
> dumping problems in the fg communities lap is not my intention.I've
> also noticed that most aircraft designer's already have their own
> webpages to distribute what is in the git repository already.Cleaning
> up the Aircraft directory could be a major task though , and I don't
> feel too concerned about the whole issue , but if it comes to it , I
> hope those with write access wont hesitate to remove any of my work.
If I might wrap this one up by summarizing my research and our interesting
and valuable discussion here:
1. Trademarks. We might or might not infringe a particular trademark
depending on the terms of the registration. I have given examples across the
spectrum.
2. Copyright. I wasn't going to address this one on the assumption that we
aircraft developers, as copyright holders ourselves are well aware of the
law, but:
"Copyright is infringed where either the whole or a substantial part of a
work is used without permission, unless the copying falls within the scope
of one of the copyright exceptions."
The exceptions do not apply to us. Copyright does not have to be registered,
it exists if the work is original.
3. Enforcement. In the event of an infringement, rights have to be enforced
by the trademark/copyright holder. In the first instance, this is most
likely to be an instruction to remove the offending item. If we comply that
is likely to be the end of it, but it is open to the rights holder to go to
court and seek damages. Some legislations (certainly the US and UK) have the
concept of "Fair Dealing", There is no strict definition of what this means
but it has been interpreted by the courts on a number of occasions by
looking at the economic impact on the copyright owner of the use. Where the
economic impact is not significant, the use may count as fair dealing.
4. Permission. A developer may seek permission from a rights holder. I would
assess that would be more likely to succeed if permission were sought under
copyright to reproduce the logo, rather than "use their trademark" since:
a. that describes most accurately what we do
and b. trademarks are a valued resource and not lightly given away or
licensed.
You could then put "reproduced with the kind permission of ... " on your
work. However, we have been informed very unofficially by one company that
if we do ask they will have to say no, but they are unlikely to enforce
their rights. If you ask, and get the answer no, then I think you are
duty-bound not to go ahead regardless.
5. Scope. This affects a relatively small number of items in our data,
principally, but not exclusively, the logos or trademarks of extant
airlines.
6. Way Ahead. When I use the term "we" or "us" I really mean Curt, since it
his name which appears on our website. So over to you, Curt.
Enough already. I now know more than I wanted to about trademarks, but I
have enjoyed the intellectual exercise. Now what was that about FlightPro
Sim ...
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
