Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims

2008-04-11 Thread LeeE
On Thursday 10 April 2008 15:46, Ralf Gerlich wrote:
 Hi!

 LeeE wrote:
  [...], there should be nothing to prevent a photographer from
  taking a photograph of the Eiffel Tower lights and exhibiting
  it to others, as long as they don't do so for profit, because
  it's their personal view and artistic expression of something
  they've seen in the public domain.

 Typically copyright does not distinguish between for profit and
 not for profit. The main distinction is what in Germany is
 called geschäftsmäßig, which is something like in a regular
 manner. Distributing the models in a package for general
 availability probably falls in this category, whether for profit
 or not.

 IANAL.

 Cheers,
 Ralf

I was thinking more along the lines of publicly displaying the photo 
in an exhibition, which I don't think could be regarded as 
distribution, as opposed to selling copies of it, which would be 
classed as distribution.

LeeE

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims

2008-04-11 Thread Ove Kaaven
LeeE skrev:
 I was thinking more along the lines of publicly displaying the photo 
 in an exhibition, which I don't think could be regarded as 
 distribution,

I suspect the RIAA and MPAA would disagree...

 as opposed to selling copies of it, which would be 
 classed as distribution.



-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims

2008-04-11 Thread LeeE
On Friday 11 April 2008 12:17, Ove Kaaven wrote:
 LeeE skrev:
  I was thinking more along the lines of publicly displaying the
  photo in an exhibition, which I don't think could be regarded
  as distribution,

 I suspect the RIAA and MPAA would disagree...

  as opposed to selling copies of it, which would be
  classed as distribution.

Different scenario entirely.  The RIAA/MPAA only have a remit that 
covers the duplication/re-distribution of specific recordings, 
either audio or visual, of specific performances - for example, 
they cannot prevent cover/tribute bands from performing copyrighted 
material, although the writer, or copyright holder of the, lyrics 
or melody, might be able to - not sure about this but if so it 
would prevent people from humming or whistling a song they heard on 
the radio.  However, if a cover/tribute band wanted to release and 
distribute their own version of copyrighted material they would 
definitely have to get permission from the copyright holder.

LeeE

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims

2008-04-11 Thread Ralf Gerlich
LeeE wrote:
 On Friday 11 April 2008 12:17, Ove Kaaven wrote:
 LeeE skrev:
 I was thinking more along the lines of publicly displaying the
 photo in an exhibition, which I don't think could be regarded
 as distribution,
 I suspect the RIAA and MPAA would disagree...

Why are we discussing the term exhibition here? I would say that by
any reasonable interpretation the term does not apply to what the
FlightGear project is doing with its models.

Cheers,
Ralf

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


[Flightgear-devel] FYI: EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims

2008-04-10 Thread Melchior FRANZ
http://www.johnmacneill.com/WWII_Bomber.html
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/liberate-b-24-liberator

m.

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims

2008-04-10 Thread LeeE
On Thursday 10 April 2008 11:33, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
 http://www.johnmacneill.com/WWII_Bomber.html
 http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/liberate-b-24-liberator

 m.

Thanks for posting that.

I think the EFF article has the best take on it - it was not 
appropriate grant the term B-24 as a trade-mark in the first 
place.  The article points out that B-24 is a US Military model 
number but perhaps even more importantly, it should have made it 
clear that B-24 is just one entry in an identification scheme 
devised by, and therefore 'owned' by, the US military, which means, 
in effect, the US government.

There are actually two potential issues raised by this - trademark 
law and copyright law.

In this case, L-M seem to have gone for trademark law, specifically 
over the use of B-24 and because of this there should be no 
problem with releasing any of the PB4Y-1 Naval variants.  
Similarly, any of the B-24 models used by the RAF, and known 
as Liberators would also not be covered (I'm not sure if the 
name 'Liberator' was originated in the US but it was standard 
practice for the RAF to re-name US aircraft e.g. the B-29 
SuperFortress became the 'Washington', the Douglas A-20 Havoc 
became the Boston etc, but in any case, the trademark is for B-24 
and not Liberator).

Furthermore, if it is B-24 that has been trademarked, it is 
questionable if this covers specific variants such as 
B-24A/B/C/D/E/G/H/J models as once again, these are specific 
entries in the US Military numbering scheme.

Copyright law may yet become an issue in these types of case, 
because copyright deals with the actual design and is intended to 
stop copyrighted designs from being copied for means of profit.  
However, even this has become a bit of a minefield because the 
copyrighted design, in the case of aircraft for example, is for a 
real aircraft and not a model or representation of it, which does 
not purport to be an actual example of the real article, and which 
may include paintings, drawings, cartoons, photographs or 3D 
models.  It is also unlikely that laws will be introduced to 
prevent people from making reproductions of things they have seen 
in public with their own eyes.

I seem to remember that copyright was used by the people who 
installed the lights on the Eiffel Tower to stop other people from 
selling postcards showing the tower at night.  In this case though, 
it could be argued that the whole point of the postcards was to 
primarily show the lighting design, which was copyrighted, and not 
the tower itself, which was not.  Re the point about laws 
preventing people from making reproductions of things they have 
seen, there should be nothing to prevent a photographer from taking 
a photograph of the Eiffel Tower lights and exhibiting it to 
others, as long as they don't do so for profit, because it's their 
personal view and artistic expression of something they've seen in 
the public domain.

We do need to keep our eyes on this though.

LeeE

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims

2008-04-10 Thread Melchior FRANZ
* LeeE -- Thursday 10 April 2008:
 Thanks for posting that.

BTW: the discussion about the first link is also interesting:

  http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/21/wwii-bomber-trademar.html

m.

-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel