Heiko > > > Or maybe Company A hasn't yet noticed that Company B is > > using the > > trademark without permission? > > I doubt that! > X-Plane is very well known already, much more than FlightGear. Austin has > laywers, he certainly knows what he is allowed to do. (on the contrary to > us! ;-)) > > > > > LOL! No fair adding answers! ;) Btw, > > while 99.9% of the time the cops > > will "look the other way" for speeding just slightly above > > the posted > > limit, it's *still* against the law and you *could* get > > pulled over and > > at least get a warning. So, no, "unwritten rules" > > don't change the law, > > they just change how the law is enforced... two > > totally different > > concepts. > > What Vivian wants to say is, that there is certain degree of margin. > Or do you want me to tell you are able drive exactly 55mph 100% exactly > without tempomat anytime needed? > > The fact is: there are some "Trademarks" which can be used without any > problems. "Police", "Post" or "Red Cross" and a lot of others. > I know one company which even put up a detailed set of their paint scheme > including their Trademark for Download just for modelers. > > > > > > I don't accept that having an aircraft that doesn't include > > a trademark > > on the livery makes that aircraft (or livery) > > "dodgy." Personally, I > > don't fly an aircraft because of the livery it has but, > > rather, because > > I like the way the aircraft flies. I know there are > > those who say that > > the FG Project will be "ruined" if we don't include > > trademarks in the > > liveries, but personally I doubt that would be the case. > > > If you would take a look into the forums of FlightGear, X-Plane, MSFS you > would see that it is very popular to repaint aircrafts and that it is very > attracting to fly their "own" aircraft. > There is high number of payware addons companies who certainly don't pay > any fee because they use any trademark for a livery. > > > Ever heard of this sentence? "An aircraft which looks good and pleasant, > also does fly like that" > Of course mostly of their shape, but often the painting completes their > well-designed shape. > > We have people flying aircraft in FGFS due to their flight behavior. > We have people flying aircraft in FGFS due to their nice modelling. > We have poeple flying aircraft in FGFS due to both. > > You have to acceppt that there are more people involved than just you. > And yes, I fear also that we may loose attraction compared to other sims > when we start to delete liveries with any trademark. > > > > And, finally, if it's really the case that FG simply *must* > > have symbols > > on our aircraft liveries, what's wrong with *make believe* > > icons? Is it > > *really* such a "disaster" if we don't have Red Bull, > > Macdonalds, > > Guinness, United Airlines, TWA, or any other trademarked > > symbol on our > > aircraft? Frankly, i think not! > > What's wrong with *make believe* icons? Depending on the owner of the real > icon it can be that you still be sued for. > There have been a lot of examples (especially Red Bull) like that. Juist > google for "Blue Bull". > > > The fact is- no one, not you, not me, not anybody here does really know > what we may, and what not. > > I discussed this issues with Oliver Off-list, and he pointed to me that we > may have use in germany some trademarks just because they are part of the > daily life. So it would be possible to use "Lufthansa" without any > problems. And indeed: they just don't like VirtualAirlines with their > name, but don't mind any repaint. > And there are some examples more. > > Trademarks not of the daily life (like Red Bull) can't be used that > easily. If someone wants still to use it, he is in the risque to be sued. > > > Of course, this is in germany- how it is in UK? or in australia? In > russia? > Even in each country the different courts may decide different on the same > issue. > > > I can can only follow John Holden's statement: we should make us aware of > what we are allowed to and what not. What are our rights? >
Nice summary: I think you have answered your own question :-). Your rights? You have copyright over anything that is your original work. Anything else, someone else probably has a right over. If not trademark, then copyright. They may chose not to exercise that right (yet), or give you permission. There is some latitude: "Fair Dealing" (where that exists) and as you mentioned above etc. Don't assume that because a trademark exists that it can't be used in a different context. That depends on the Class(es) in which it is registered. That's probably it. I thought I would do a bit of research over at X-Plane. I see that they have registered X-Plane as a trademark in the US - that would seem sensible. I don't see any reference to other trademarks or copyrights. I half expected to see something like "All logos and trademarks are reproduced with the kind permission of their respective owners". I couldn't find anything. It's only a courtesy, so we can't read too much into that. One final thought. We have been using logos in FG ever since I've been involved - 2004 and probably longer. In that time we have not had a problem. Are we saying that no rights holder has ever noticed it anywhere? I find that a bit improbable; perhaps they arent looking or aren't bothered. Of course, I'm inviting disaster to strike us Monday morning. 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
