On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Luis Villa <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Dave Neary <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Shaun McCance wrote: >>> On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 19:27 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: >>>> Selon Claudio Saavedra <[email protected]>: >>>>> http://www.randomimage.us/ >>>>> >>>>> I think that would be some kind of copyright infringment (IANAL). >>>> Thanks for the heads-up. In this instance, it is a case of trademark >>>> infringement, not copyright infringement. I've sent them an e-mail asking >>>> them >>>> to stop using our mark. If they refuse, we'll have to get the foundation's >>>> lawyers to send a nastygram. >>> >>> I was just browsing my email archive for discussions about >>> logo usage guidelines, and ran across this. This site is >>> still (or again), using the foot. >>> >>> Can we do something about this please? >> >> Just replying to what I said back in 2006 (I'll let someone else take >> care of it this time) - I'm not sure if we'd get them under trademark >> infringement, it's probably a better bet to use copyright, since it >> appears they just lifted some GNOME artwork for the logo. >> >> I'll let our resident IANALY comment though... Luis? > > That is roughly correct. I'll send another letter. Dave, who did you > send it to the last time?
Though of course this (again) raises the question of what copyright license the foot is usually issued under- I don't actually know offhand. Does anyone? :) [Note that it probably isn't trademark infringement because they aren't in the same general market we are; if they were selling software like we do instead of a website it'd be different.] Luis _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
