Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Curs Olsen wrote: So why aren't we *removing* all our existing uses of the redbull logo ... or at least the ones that I can find in 2 seconds? None of the people who are saying Jack can't submit his helicopter with a redbull livery are saying anything about the 2 aircraft and several scenery database models that clearly also use the redbull logo and have existed in our sim for years. Sorry Curt, but I did say we have to care ;) Oliver -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Myself wasn't aware of that we have other models with the RD-logo as well. I'm not sure if Oliver, the starter of this debate is. I pretty much am since Jack pointed me to those *sigh* (never noticed it before) and yes, I did say that we have to care about them to Jack. There is no reason to take it personal. Oliver -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Gene Buckle wrote: Regardless, nothing relating to open source use of logos on aircraft models in flight simulator. It does not matter whether open source projects, private persons or commercial enterprises. In fact in certain areas (eg. file sharing) private persons are more frequently approached just because it is more beneficial for lawyers. Putting a trademarked icon on an ebay sell? On a private web site? Good luck. Various chambers have built their own business model around copyright and trademark enforcement by actively seeking for infringements. If you think RB will not approach us, you might be right. However such a lawyers chamber might realize the infringement in FlightGear and approach Red Bull to act as a representative for them. Such requests are often granted as this is a win-win situation: The lawyer gets all penalties and fees and RB has its TM enforced. Next step: Finding out where the content is hosted and distributed from. Which is the FlightGear web site and the scenery database. Get the owners of the sites. Calculate the penalty fee- the higher the better for the lawyer, therefore in the worst case it is calculated based on the number of downloads. If unknown it is estimated. Send out the letter which is preformulated. Effort: At max 1 day. Return on invest ensured. Would you say a chamber would just say Oh no, poor open source guys, I suspend my business model in a country in which mothers are sued to pay 3 mio. US$ just because they have shared half a dozen music titles? Note that I actually found a picture of a real AH-1 Cobra (http://www.airplane-pictures.net/image49158.html) in Red Bull livery - this tells me that if Jack's AH-1 uses this same livery, there is likely no infringement at all. The AH1 is a picture of a AH1 which either belongs to RBs fleet or for which someone has paid licenses to have it. Photographing the real thing, especially if publically presented, is not an issue. If one rebuild this livery (reproduction) and distributes it is a clear violation of trademarks as you make a copy. In fact distributing the logo is the by far more problematic issue from a legal point of view. Awesome. Presented in a country in which I don't reside _and_ in a language I don't read or speak. Red Bull has subsidiaries in the US and trademark law is enforced on a global scale. This has nothing to do with language or country borders. Note that while hard to see from your high horse, you might want to look I am no longer surprised that various discussions end up becoming pretty personal sooner or later. It is propably peoples nature or education how to show respectful or disrespectful behavior towards people and trademarks. Oliver -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Hi, Technically, all these logos are under trademark: http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/737-100/Models/Liveries/731CA.png;h=43cfc5a15abb392519e1f95d34951d410d3c3c80;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/737-100/Models/Liveries/731continw.png;h=2c7854e28f50ebfd270551fea6ee17c161ca56a6;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/747-400/Models/Liveries/KLM.png;h=fb5a5e15737ff7d45cb4b6c4ecae1c664221fd4c;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/ACA.png;h=24cab3acc9be66ffa819d4b86b3d269d6c5c146d;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/AFR.png;h=feb509950de44037ee2ffe72d99e803820f2078c;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/ANZ.png;h=6ac933fa22c33e0f0b637c032cdc473108fee367;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/AUA.png;h=6fa2d4d95c4e614bb67b a3514a09d60b253e45d7;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/BAW.png;h=c13d743667bf7de26df391ee1baf6627f012ae9b;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/UAL.png;h=5c93dbbe501aa1a44adbaeac305e4a637ff8adec;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/777-200/Models/DAL-Livery.png;h=e516842b15c4cd8e42c3f20dd2bbd9e1cfcebb8e;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/777-200/Models/KLM.png;h=76ca78871b1b5cd58eb0533aefc91eb63b5e7149;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ec135/Models/fuselage.adac.png;h=effa8b73133ad6991dc615ea670b5a3db58dcc0e;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ec135/Models/fuselage.anwb.png;h=f4ca4abcc551aeca443ca68b06f60006ef84af12;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ZivkoEdge/Models/Liveries/Fuse lage-RedBull.png;h=4af09d1cb79a04528b824447190bc68e809ecceb;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ZivkoEdge/Models/Liveries/WingTail-RedBull.png;h=592707498df5f8f923b2c9da1f3e9a68370ddd7e;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/Zlin-50lx/Models/Liveries/red-bull.png;h=d60378d6af8635efc3f5b15a1345e2a810f65fcb;hb=HEAD I can dish out links all day if I have to I surprised that you mentioned ADAC and ANWB. Both are known that they won't give any problems. Problem is more the Eurocopter-logo which I should better remove. I hope I find some time tomorrow to do that. The problem is, Jack, and that's something it seems to me you didn't understand: The problem is really only the Red Bull logo, as they are known to make problems. If other sims use this logo, then only because Red Bull didn't discoverd it yet. Mostly all other logos using in this sim are known not to be a problem. Cheers Heiko -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
First of all sorry for the reply format, I only have access to the weekly digest currently so response are a bit out of context. Will change this soon. Heiko Schulz wrote: Problem is more the Eurocopter-logo which I should better remove. Last year there was a high court decision in Germany regarding the trademarked logos of Opel (spark) and Mercedes (the well known star). The court stated that a replica of an item can include trademarked logos if they integrally belong to the original item. This means that a Opel car replica is expected to have that spark logo as well as a Mercedes should have the star. A trademark holder can not enforce to exclude it nor can he claim licensing fees in the worst case. So for the Eurocopter logo the same applies if it is placed on an Eurocopter helicopter replica. It would be different to place it on a Bell aircraft. Therefore I believe we are on the safe side here. As to airline liveries things are more in a grey area but pretty similar. You expect the LH livery to be on an Airbus A380, CRJ200, etc. So as long as it is realistic and placed on the right plane type I would not expect issues here as this is common appearance and noone would expect that the A320 in FSX or FlightGear is directly affiliated with Lufthansa. Putting a LH livery on a plane is replicating LHs core business. Red Bull in turn is in a different core business and intensively merchandises its trademark for other businesses. So putting the logo on a can is prohibited as well as putting it on every other item as well as aircrafts, be it real or virtual unless stated otherwise. However I am not sure what the issue would be if we realistically modeled a RB beverage can- maybe RB would pay for advertising :) Oliver -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, syd adams wrote: Ok I tried to keep out of it ...;) The issue isn't your work , it's the concern over the Red Bull livery I haven't yet figured out why it's so important to include , there must be many other paint schemes that could be added instead. I did 777 British Airways livery with some trepidation , and would remove it immediately if instructed to do so. What strikes me the most about these emails is your seemingly arrogant responses to an issue that some are concerned about: It's not about your great work , it's about Flightgear overall. That's just my 2 cents , I'll shut up now :) I think the problem is that someone got on their high horse and started jerking him around. If I were him, I'd get just as snotty about it - more so probably as I've got a much lower tolerance for that kind of nonsense. Frankly, the inclusion of the livery is a tempest in a teapot. The flight simulation community has been using commercial liveries without issue for well over a decade. I've NEVER heard of anyone ever being sued by a rights holder over a livery and I've been around this hobby for a VERY long time. There's entirely too much fear mongering going on and it really needs to stop. It has no basis in reality. Never has. Frankly I think people are stirring shit up JUST to stir shit up. If a rights holder contacts us about removing a livery, you and I (and whether they'll admit it or not, everyone else) knows that efforts to comply with that request will be very swift indeed. It's not like FlightGear is a commercial product that is leveraging trademarked liveries in order to benefit from them. Companies like Microsoft MUST license that kind of thing because they're selling a product. (They also do it in order to prevent competing products from benefiting from brand identity - it's why Fly! and Fly! II had to call their Cessna 172 the Trainer 172. MS couldn't beat them technologically, so they jerked them around by arranging exclusive licensing with Textron...but anyway) Jack, I personally greatly enjoy the work you've put into that armed up fling wing of yours. If people give you any crap about the textures, tell 'em to See Figure #1 and ignore 'em. They're just a bunch of bloviating windbags with nothing better to do but run in circles, screaming about crap that'll never happen. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
understand: The problem is really only the Red Bull logo, as they are known to make problems. If other sims use this logo, then only because Red Bull didn't discoverd it yet. Mostly all other logos using in this Citation please. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Heiko, As I've said before, this simply isn't true! Red Bull are very accommodating, I've spoken to them before about this on a commercial product and they required no licensing agreement at all, simply an email from myself saying that we weren't marketing it as a Red Bull product, simply a product that had a Red Bull livery. In fact if anyone wants I'll dig out the old contact and see if they are still there and would be willing to make a statement about FG's use. I imagine it will be very similar, but responses don't come fast. Alex On 17 Feb 2011, at 10:13, Heiko Schulz wrote: The problem is really only the Red Bull logo, as they are known to make problems. If other sims use this logo, then only because Red Bull didn't discoverd it yet. Mostly all other logos using in this sim are known not to be a problem. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
I think the problem is that someone got on their high horse and started jerking him around. If I were him, I'd get just as snotty about it - more so probably as I've got a much lower tolerance for that kind of nonsense. [...] stop. It has no basis in reality. Never has. Frankly I think people are stirring shit up JUST to stir shit up. [...] If people give you any crap about the textures, tell 'em to See Figure #1 and ignore 'em. They're just a bunch of bloviating windbags with nothing better to do but run in circles, screaming about crap that'll never happen. The funny thing is that this mail ended up in my spam folder and I believe it should remain there due to its offensive character. You can´t just walk through your neighbors garden just because he is not at home, won´t see it and won´t complain about it. If we are going in circles then the reason is that some people ignore all information and links provided and restart everything with give me evidence and then don´t care. Evidence *has* been provided that Red Bull is actively sueing folks using the logo for similar purposes, information *has* been provided that RB is seeking the web for copyright infringements and information *has* been provided that using the trademark without explicit grant is illegal. Why restart from scratch? Simon already inquired RB and until then hold your breath and hope it goes well. Otherwise the state is pretty clear and we will have to take actions. This is btw. another stupid effect of FlightProSim selling FlightGear- this makes it even worse and increases chances that FG will appear on RBs radar one day. Oliver -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
For what it's worth, the RedBull logo is currently used in the scene model database to decorate the redbull air race pylons. We also have two aircraft in git that also have RedBull logos. These are just the instances I found in a 2 second search because they had redbull in the file name. There could easily be other uses of it in places with different file names ... that would be a bit harder to find without examining each image in our database individually. I'm sure these known usages of the redbull logo are actively being scrubbed right now??? If not, it sure makes all of this rhetoric sound pretty hollow. Hmmm, I just did a git pull and they are still there. I guess no one is moving too quickly on these existing infractions. I don't mind a healthy debate, but so far this whole thing has smacked of inconsistency at best (assuming the purest motives of everyone involved and that no one is speaking out of anger or frustration here.) Best regards, Curt. On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Oliver Fels oliver.f...@gmx.net wrote: I think the problem is that someone got on their high horse and started jerking him around. If I were him, I'd get just as snotty about it - more so probably as I've got a much lower tolerance for that kind of nonsense. [...] stop. It has no basis in reality. Never has. Frankly I think people are stirring shit up JUST to stir shit up. [...] If people give you any crap about the textures, tell 'em to See Figure #1 and ignore 'em. They're just a bunch of bloviating windbags with nothing better to do but run in circles, screaming about crap that'll never happen. The funny thing is that this mail ended up in my spam folder and I believe it should remain there due to its offensive character. You can´t just walk through your neighbors garden just because he is not at home, won´t see it and won´t complain about it. If we are going in circles then the reason is that some people ignore all information and links provided and restart everything with give me evidence and then don´t care. Evidence *has* been provided that Red Bull is actively sueing folks using the logo for similar purposes, information *has* been provided that RB is seeking the web for copyright infringements and information *has* been provided that using the trademark without explicit grant is illegal. Why restart from scratch? Simon already inquired RB and until then hold your breath and hope it goes well. Otherwise the state is pretty clear and we will have to take actions. This is btw. another stupid effect of FlightProSim selling FlightGear- this makes it even worse and increases chances that FG will appear on RBs radar one day. Oliver -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/curt/http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/personal/curt/ -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011, Oliver Fels wrote: I think the problem is that someone got on their high horse and started jerking him around. If I were him, I'd get just as snotty about it - more so probably as I've got a much lower tolerance for that kind of nonsense. [...] stop. It has no basis in reality. Never has. Frankly I think people are stirring shit up JUST to stir shit up. [...] If people give you any crap about the textures, tell 'em to See Figure #1 and ignore 'em. They're just a bunch of bloviating windbags with nothing better to do but run in circles, screaming about crap that'll never happen. The funny thing is that this mail ended up in my spam folder and I believe it should remain there due to its offensive character. I'm sorry if reality offends your delicate sensibilities. You can´t just walk through your neighbors garden just because he is not at home, won´t see it and won´t complain about it. Nice strawman. Physical tresspass != trademark infringment. If we are going in circles then the reason is that some people ignore all information and links provided and restart everything with give me evidence and then don´t care. Evidence *has* been provided that Red Bull is actively sueing folks using the logo for similar purposes, information *has* been provided that RB is seeking the web for copyright infringements and information *has* been provided that using the trademark without explicit grant is illegal. Why restart from scratch? I've never seen a link to a legal document that has shown RedBull to be actively engaging any entity or group over the use of their trademark logo in any open source project. Put up or shut up. Simple as that. Simon already inquired RB and until then hold your breath and hope it goes well. Otherwise the state is pretty clear and we will have to take actions. Until RedBull says in very clear language, Hey FlightGear! We need you to remove all images that contain our trademark from your scenery aircraft databases! you need to stop getting your undies in a twist. This is btw. another stupid effect of FlightProSim selling FlightGear- this makes it even worse and increases chances that FG will appear on RBs radar one day. This doesn't have a damn thing to do with that and you know it. I'd LOVE RedBull to chase after FPS! I'm all for anything that'll turn dan freeman into a smoking hole in the ground. Understand this - no company is going to go to the time and expenditure of a lawsuit of any kind when they know full well a simple letter will accomplish the same task. It would be completely different if FlightGear was a commerical, for-profit project. If THAT were the case, we'd deserve the suing we'd get. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.-- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On 2/17/2011 10:15 AM, Curtis Olson wrote: For what it's worth, the RedBull logo is currently used in the scene model database to decorate the redbull air race pylons. We also have two aircraft in git that also have RedBull logos. These are just the instances I found in a 2 second search because they had redbull in the file name. There could easily be other uses of it in places with different file names ... that would be a bit harder to find without examining each image in our database individually. I'm sure these known usages of the redbull logo are actively being scrubbed right now??? If not, it sure makes all of this rhetoric sound pretty hollow. Hmmm, I just did a git pull and they are still there. I guess no one is moving too quickly on these existing infractions. I don't mind a healthy debate, but so far this whole thing has smacked of inconsistency at best (assuming the purest motives of everyone involved and that no one is speaking out of anger or frustration here.) Best regards, Curt. On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Oliver Fels oliver.f...@gmx.net mailto:oliver.f...@gmx.net wrote: I think the problem is that someone got on their high horse and started jerking him around. If I were him, I'd get just as snotty about it - more so probably as I've got a much lower tolerance for that kind of nonsense. [...] stop. It has no basis in reality. Never has. Frankly I think people are stirring shit up JUST to stir shit up. [...] If people give you any crap about the textures, tell 'em to See Figure #1 and ignore 'em. They're just a bunch of bloviating windbags with nothing better to do but run in circles, screaming about crap that'll never happen. The funny thing is that this mail ended up in my spam folder and I believe it should remain there due to its offensive character. You can´t just walk through your neighbors garden just because he is not at home, won´t see it and won´t complain about it. If we are going in circles then the reason is that some people ignore all information and links provided and restart everything with give me evidence and then don´t care. Evidence *has* been provided that Red Bull is actively sueing folks using the logo for similar purposes, information *has* been provided that RB is seeking the web for copyright infringements and information *has* been provided that using the trademark without explicit grant is illegal. Why restart from scratch? Simon already inquired RB and until then hold your breath and hope it goes well. Otherwise the state is pretty clear and we will have to take actions. This is btw. another stupid effect of FlightProSim selling FlightGear- this makes it even worse and increases chances that FG will appear on RBs radar one day. Oliver -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://aem.umn.edu/%7Euav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/curt/ http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/personal/curt/ I knew I shouldn't have gotten into this, but since I haven't contributed any textures at all, you could say I don't have a horse in this race. While there is a murky trademark fair use defense, I'm pretty confident of my stance on the legality of using trademarks without permission. Of course there's what's legal and then there's what you can get away with. I think most folks arguing here would agree that we're debating the latter. I think have been convinced that we can get away with it in most cases and make amends in the cases where a sternly written letter is received. I agree it would be foolish and wasteful for a TM owner to actually sue without trying a C D first. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
You are all being ridiculous except for Curt. We have the ability to sell the product and could theoretically get sued even though we are open-source. As I have said, the best thing to do is put in a legal disclaimer saying we are not affiliated with any companies which may be represented in our product. It appears much of trademark law deals with misrepresentation - if we misrepresent the fact they are not associated with us then we are in trouble (IE: an ad saying Red Bull (logo) loves FlightGear to practice air racing would be bad). Cheers John -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Here's the flip side of the argument. If we are pristine and use no trademarks, then we have to go through and remove half our simulator content. That's a scorched earth policy. No one wants to do that. So the same people drawing the line in the sand on the redbull logo start waffling on every other trademark about how it's probably ok, and others have done it, and maybe a case or two where we actually got permission. These people take themselves right back to the what can we get away with side of the argument. So if that's where we all are right now, why are we making such a stink about one particular logo? Answer: because someone asserts (without any provided evidence that I've seen) that this particular logo will cause us trouble. Counter evidence #1 is that we've been using it for years without problems. Counter evidence #2 is someone who claims to have asked redbull and got a positive response in a different, but similar situation. So what's it going to be? Scorch the earth and be purists? Go with the accepted use in the simulation community and not worry about it unless someone asks us to stop using their logo ... like we have been all along? Or are we going to waffle in the middle on some hard to defend quick sand and take pot shots at each other based on trademarks and logos when the real issue of contention is probably something completely different. If we are going to argue, we have to keep it fair, and we have to keep it consistent ... otherwise this is just yet another run of the mill flame war that isn't accomplishing anything but to piss everyone off ... and at best the resolution is we stop fighting, but we do nothing because we are still staring at each other out of our individual trenches. Personally I think this whole drawing the line in the sand on just one particular logo is on pretty shifty ground myself ... Can someone who is arguing against redbull logo usage write up a clearly defined, logical, consistant logo/trademark usage policy that results in the same differentiation between the redbull logo and every other logo in the world ... because I have trouble coming up with anything like that myself. Best regards, Curt. On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Reagan Thomas thomas...@gmail.com wrote: On 2/17/2011 10:15 AM, Curtis Olson wrote: For what it's worth, the RedBull logo is currently used in the scene model database to decorate the redbull air race pylons. We also have two aircraft in git that also have RedBull logos. These are just the instances I found in a 2 second search because they had redbull in the file name. There could easily be other uses of it in places with different file names ... that would be a bit harder to find without examining each image in our database individually. I'm sure these known usages of the redbull logo are actively being scrubbed right now??? If not, it sure makes all of this rhetoric sound pretty hollow. Hmmm, I just did a git pull and they are still there. I guess no one is moving too quickly on these existing infractions. I don't mind a healthy debate, but so far this whole thing has smacked of inconsistency at best (assuming the purest motives of everyone involved and that no one is speaking out of anger or frustration here.) Best regards, Curt. On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Oliver Fels oliver.f...@gmx.net mailto:oliver.f...@gmx.net wrote: I think the problem is that someone got on their high horse and started jerking him around. If I were him, I'd get just as snotty about it - more so probably as I've got a much lower tolerance for that kind of nonsense. [...] stop. It has no basis in reality. Never has. Frankly I think people are stirring shit up JUST to stir shit up. [...] If people give you any crap about the textures, tell 'em to See Figure #1 and ignore 'em. They're just a bunch of bloviating windbags with nothing better to do but run in circles, screaming about crap that'll never happen. The funny thing is that this mail ended up in my spam folder and I believe it should remain there due to its offensive character. You can´t just walk through your neighbors garden just because he is not at home, won´t see it and won´t complain about it. If we are going in circles then the reason is that some people ignore all information and links provided and restart everything with give me evidence and then don´t care. Evidence *has* been provided that Red Bull is actively sueing folks using the logo for similar purposes, information *has* been provided that RB is seeking the web for copyright infringements and information *has* been provided that using the trademark without explicit grant is illegal. Why restart from scratch? Simon already inquired RB and until then hold your breath and
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
I'm sorry if reality offends your delicate sensibilities. May I remind you of this quote here: They're just a bunch of bloviating windbags with nothing better to do but run in circles, If that is your style it does not deserve more comments. You can´t just walk through your neighbors garden just because he is not at home, won´t see it and won´t complain about it. Nice strawman. Physical tresspass != trademark infringment. So your sense for legal and illegal depends ? Illegal trespassing is not ok but copyright infringement (by intention) is? For what it´s worth, trademark infringements are often higher punished than illegal trespassing. Depending on the value of the item in question, starting by a few thousands. I've never seen a link to a legal document that has shown RedBull to be actively engaging any entity or group over the use of their trademark logo in any open source project. Put up or shut up. Simple as that. RB is against *any* unauthorized usage. RB *has* denied usage on various RC models (as Heiko and myself stated, links in German upon request) and just that they have not sued FG or a contact person yet does not mean they will not in the future. Because they have every single right to do so and we don´t have any right to include RB trademarks into FlightGear GIT. Until RedBull says in very clear language, Hey FlightGear! We need you to remove all images that contain our trademark from your scenery aircraft databases! you need to stop getting your undies in a twist. Once again: Wrong direction. It is your/my/our responsibility to ensure legality. In case of RB we know that we are currently in an illegal state. This is btw. another stupid effect of FlightProSim selling FlightGear- this makes it even worse and increases chances that FG will appear on RBs radar one day. This doesn't have a damn thing to do with that and you know it. I'd LOVE RedBull to chase after FPS! The following would happen: RB says hey they are selling our logo in that FPS thing and address FPS. FPS will tell them something about GPL and point directly to FlightGear. There you are on the radar. The fact that FPS is commercially selling derivates of FG is pretty critical. Understand this - no company is going to go to the time and expenditure of a lawsuit of any kind when they know full well a simple letter will accomplish the same task. Sueing is not the first step today. The first step always is a declaration of discontinuance with an immediate penalty clause. Lawyers love those as it is pretty few effort and high benefit for them. Oliver -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 08:43:19 -0800 (PST), J. wrote in message 234538.53500...@web33103.mail.mud.yahoo.com: You are all being ridiculous except for Curt. We have the ability to sell the product and could theoretically get sued even though we are open-source. As I have said, the best thing to do is put in a legal disclaimer saying we are not affiliated with any companies which may be represented in our product. It appears much of trademark law deals with misrepresentation - if we misrepresent the fact they are not associated with us then we are in trouble (IE: an ad saying Red Bull (logo) loves FlightGear to practice air racing would be bad). ..the mere absence of such a legal disclaimer, can be construed as a misrepresentation, and done in a frivolous law suit, it _will_ cost us money to hire some law shark to file a formally acceptable response to such a claim to the relevant courts. ..yes, it _is_ possible to try do it yourself, in about the same way FG qualifies each of us as F-104G pilots. ..not responding, means _lose_ by default. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
IMO, our use of trademarked material is just fair use (google 'copyright fair use' if you like) and it's something we shouldn't worry about. -Fred -- Frédéric Bouvier http://www.youtube.com/user/fgfred64 Videos -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On 2/17/2011 11:25 AM, Frederic Bouvier wrote: IMO, our use of trademarked material is just fair use (google 'copyright fair use' if you like) and it's something we shouldn't worry about. -Fred Close, but google trademark fair use instead. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
As I am sure many other people will point out, fair use is a specific provision of copyright law - it has absolutely nothing to do with trademark law. gl On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Frederic Bouvier fredfgf...@free.frwrote: IMO, our use of trademarked material is just fair use (google 'copyright fair use' if you like) and it's something we shouldn't worry about. -Fred -- Frédéric Bouvier http://www.youtube.com/user/fgfred64 Videos -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- It's just an inch from me to you, Depending on what map you use - Jewel -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Am 17.02.11 18:30, schrieb Gene Lege: As I am sure many other people will point out, fair use is a specific provision of copyright law - it has absolutely nothing to do with trademark law. It looks like Red Bull has licenses to use their trademark for Apps and Games. An example for this is Red Bull Motocross: Created developed by Xendex. © 2010 Xendex Holding GmbH. All Rights Reserved. Xendex is a registered trademark of Xendex Holding GmbH. Published by Digital Chocolate. www.digitalchocolate.com © 2010 Digital Chocolate. All Rights Reserved. The RED BULL trademark, the RED BULL Device trademark and Double Bull Device are trademarks of Red Bull GmbH/Austria and used under license. Red Bull GmbH/Austria reserves all rights therein and unauthorized uses are prohibited. When a company has licenses for the use of trademark in software and has also such a marketing strategy maybe we should really care? -Yves -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Fair use is also a defense for trademarks. The problem is these are defenses - they will only work if we are defendants in a lawsuit, and we don't want to litigate. We should take a path which maximizes our resources while minimizes our potential to get sued, or at least have a lot of data removed from our repository. For instance, it is clear we can't use Google data for mapping by the terms of their license agreement. It is less clear on these trademark issues. Stating we do not endorse any companies or products which may be used within the simulator is a step forward, because it seems we would be in compliance. However as I've said before I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. The good news is we are unlikely to be sued. Still it is a good idea to state we do not endorse any products or companies presented in this software, stated in section 1125(a) found here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_1125000-.html Cheers John -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Hi, understand: The problem is really only the Red Bull logo, as they are known to make problems. If other sims use this logo, then only because Red Bull didn't discoverd it yet. Mostly all other logos using in this Citation please. Easy: Google Red Bull Trademark and you will find forums discussing this topic. Better: Google: Red Bull Trademark sue But for the lazy ones: (in german) http://www.rc-network.de/forum/showthread.php/49082-Red-Bull-Vorlage-Folie/page1 http://www.rclineforum.de/forum/thread.php?threadid=261953 Here the user Stefan asked Red Bull for using their logo for a RC-model which he does use only for his own and now got an answer (in german): weshalb wir natürlich größtes Verständnis für Ihre Anfrage haben. Trotzdem können wir Ihrem Wunsch, Ihre Modellflieger in unserem Design zu lackieren, aus nachstehenden Gründen keine Flügel verleihen. Wie Sie sich sicherlich gut vorstellen können, wird unser Logo naturgemäß immer mit der Red Bull Firmengruppe in Verbindung gebracht, obwohl der potentielle Nutzer des Logos tatsächlich gar nicht mit Red Bull in Verbindung steht. Genau diese Situation versuchen wir aber mit unserer stringenten Markenstrategie zu verhindern, weil die Marke sonst verwässert wird. Wir investieren sehr viel Arbeit und Geld, um unsere Marken entsprechend zu positionieren und dies ist auch mit einer sehr starken Kontrolle unserer Markenrechte verbunden. Aus diesem Grund bitten wir für die ablehnende Entscheidung um Verständnis. Der guten Ordnung halber erlauben wir uns, Sie darauf hinzuweisen, dass sowohl der Name Red Bull, die zwei Stiere vor der Sonne als auch das Blau/Silberne Trapez (mithin der gesamte Marktauftritt von Red Bull) markenrechtlich vollumfänglich geschützt sind und nur mit Erlaubnis von Red Bull verwendet werden dürfen. Andernfalls steht eine Markenrechtsverletzung im Raum. Wir hoffen auf Ihr wertes Verständnis und wünschen Ihnen weiterhin alles Gute! Mit besten Grüßen, Harald Reiter Geschäftsführer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i.A. Andrea Hattinger Assistant to Harald Reiter In the last sentence they clearly say: The name, the bulls in front of the sun and the trapez (with that the whole trademark) are completly copyrighted and registered trademark by Red Bull and may only used with permission of Red Bull. Cheers Heiko -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Hi, Last year there was a high court decision in Germany regarding the trademarked logos of Opel (spark) and Mercedes (the well known star). The court stated that a replica of an item can include trademarked logos if they integrally belong to the original item. This means that a Opel car replica is expected to have that spark logo as well as a Mercedes should have the star. A trademark holder can not enforce to exclude it nor can he claim licensing fees in the worst case. So for the Eurocopter logo the same applies if it is placed on an Eurocopter helicopter replica. It would be different to place it on a Bell aircraft. Therefore I believe we are on the safe side here. I read about this, but I'm not sure if this applies to my model as well. As to airline liveries things are more in a grey area but pretty similar. You expect the LH livery to be on an Airbus A380, CRJ200, etc. So as long as it is realistic and placed on the right plane type I would not expect issues here as this is common appearance and noone would expect that the A320 in FSX or FlightGear is directly affiliated with Lufthansa. Putting a LH livery on a plane is replicating LHs core business. I hope this is right. There have been many decisions and it depends on each court. The fact is that every logo is part of the trademark and so it is protected and the owner may forbid this thing. Red Bull stated exactly this in a link I gave here in the discussion and in the forum. A lot of companies don't mind using the logo in a correct way (the right model etc...). But using their name like for a Virtual Airlines they mind. Lufthansa seems not to mind the many thousand liveries made for the different sims. But they mind a Virtual Airline using their name. DRF (Deutsche RettungsFlugwacht) as the opposite even offers their logo and a detailed paint scheme on their homepage for using it on models. It depends on each company how they will act. Red Bull in turn is in a different core business and intensively merchandises its trademark for other businesses. So putting the logo on a can is prohibited as well as putting it on every other item as well as aircrafts, be it real or virtual unless stated otherwise. However I am not sure what the issue would be if we realistically modeled a RB beverage can- maybe RB would pay for advertising :) Oliver There are so many grey zones... The whole thing is complety mad! -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011, Heiko Schulz wrote: Hi, understand: The problem is really only the Red Bull logo, as they are known to make problems. If other sims use this logo, then only because Red Bull didn't discoverd it yet. Mostly all other logos using in this Citation please. Easy: Google Red Bull Trademark and you will find forums discussing this topic. Better: Google: Red Bull Trademark sue red bull sue is a lot funnier. Regardless, nothing relating to open source use of logos on aircraft models in flight simulator. Note that I actually found a picture of a real AH-1 Cobra (http://www.airplane-pictures.net/image49158.html) in Red Bull livery - this tells me that if Jack's AH-1 uses this same livery, there is likely no infringement at all. No more so than someone painting a picture of the Red Bull Cobra would be. http://www.rclineforum.de/forum/thread.php?threadid=261953 Here the user Stefan asked Red Bull for using their logo for a RC-model which he does use only for his own and now got an answer (in german): Awesome. Presented in a country in which I don't reside _and_ in a language I don't read or speak. If the model the person wanted to put the RB logo on is one not traditionally marked by them, then yeah, I can see they'd have a problem with it. However, if it's an accurate representation of something found here: http://www.google.com/images?hl=enbiw=1191bih=700tbs=isch%3A1sa=1q=red+bull+aircraft+collectionaq=faqi=g1aql=oq= I would suspect that RB a) would have no problem with and b) would have no reasonable legal remedy because the model would be an accurate scale representation of a real world object. This of course may be an incorrect assumption - I'm (obviously!) not a trademark attourney. Note that while hard to see from your high horse, you might want to look closely at every single aircraft in the library. See a Boeing 747 in there? Sorry, that's a trademark violation! Get rid of it or rename it. Ohh, I see a Ryan Navion. That's a violation too. We'll have to call it Plane, General Aviation, Monocoque Design, 1947. Oh darn, lookee there! It's a Piper Seneca II! That's gotta go! We'll call that one Plane, General Aviation, Twin, Reciprocating Engine. Like Curt mentioned earlier, you'd better apply the same standard across the board or don't bother. I think your best bet is to create your own little private sanitized aircraft collection so you don't have to be horrified by the rest of us scoff-laws. After you're done taking chainsaw to the FlightGear repository, you really should head over to Avsim.com, flightsim.com, etc. and make sure there's no icky trademark infringement going on over there as well. I'm sure they'll appriciate you just as much as we do! g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:00:37 +0100, Oliver wrote in message 20110217170037.16...@gmx.net: I'd LOVE RedBull to chase after FPS! The following would happen: RB says hey they are selling our logo in that FPS thing and address FPS. FPS will tell them something about GPL and point directly to FlightGear. There you are on the radar. The fact that FPS is commercially selling derivates of FG is pretty critical. Understand this - no company is going to go to the time and expenditure of a lawsuit of any kind when they know full well a simple letter will accomplish the same task. ..riiight, tell IBM, Autozone, Chrysler, Novell and Red Hat. ;o) Sueing is not the first step today. The first step always is a declaration of discontinuance with an immediate penalty clause. ..that's the first step, the next is allege There was no response! and support their allegation with volumes of paper work to someone who restricts his response to verbose 4-letter language and fails to hire an attorney to put said language on paper and properly file it with the relevant court, which isn't neccessarily the same as the one the prospective plaintiff would like to use to pin us down. ..our problem is, we _have_ to respond properly, or, watch the bad guys screw us by default. Lawyers love those as it is pretty few effort and high benefit for them. ..amen!. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Like Curt mentioned earlier, you'd better apply the same standard across the board or don't bother. I think your best bet is to create your own little private sanitized aircraft collection so you don't have to be horrified by the rest of us scoff-laws. After you're done taking chainsaw to the FlightGear repository, you really should head over to Avsim.com, flightsim.com, etc. and make sure there's no icky trademark infringement going on over there as well. I'm sure they'll appriciate you just as much as we do! g. To be honest: Yes, according to international laws a lot of the content is indeed an infringement. It depends on each company how they react. Most companies won't say anything, but in the past there have been some. Red Bull is known here that they don't like to see their logo on things they aren't affiliated with. This means as I translated: Without their permission you are not allowed to use it- even it is just for your own pleasure. But the whole flightsim with MSFS, X-Plane, Fly! and FlightGear has grown so much, that the most companies won't say anything anymore. As I described already here on the list, some companies even likes this and see it as free advertisement; some just don't want to see no Virtual Airline using their name, but are o.k. with using the logo for a repaint If Red Bull wasn't known here for his strict view Oliver never had say anything. It is our own risk how we act. Heiko -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Heiko Schulz aeitsch...@yahoo.de wrote: To be honest: Yes, according to international laws a lot of the content is indeed an infringement. It depends on each company how they react. Most companies won't say anything, but in the past there have been some. Red Bull is known here that they don't like to see their logo on things they aren't affiliated with. This means as I translated: Without their permission you are not allowed to use it- even it is just for your own pleasure. But the whole flightsim with MSFS, X-Plane, Fly! and FlightGear has grown so much, that the most companies won't say anything anymore. As I described already here on the list, some companies even likes this and see it as free advertisement; some just don't want to see no Virtual Airline using their name, but are o.k. with using the logo for a repaint If Red Bull wasn't known here for his strict view Oliver never had say anything. It is our own risk how we act. So why aren't we *removing* all our existing uses of the redbull logo ... or at least the ones that I can find in 2 seconds? None of the people who are saying Jack can't submit his helicopter with a redbull livery are saying anything about the 2 aircraft and several scenery database models that clearly also use the redbull logo and have existed in our sim for years. This smells strongly of a case where we like our policy better when it's applied to others and not ourselves. I'm not saying there isn't some logical explanation that I'm totally missing, I'm just saying what it smells like to me. Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/curt/http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/personal/curt/ -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Hi, This smells strongly of a case where we like our policy better when it's applied to others and not ourselves. I'm not saying there isn't some logical explanation that I'm totally missing, I'm just saying what it smells like to me. Myself wasn't aware of that we have other models with the RD-logo as well. I'm not sure if Oliver, the starter of this debate is. But if so, I can understand that Jack is pissed off- and yes, to be consequent we would have to remove them as well. The whole thing Repaints-Copyrights-trademarks isn't very logical. It is like so much in real life: you are allowed to do anything, as long noone sees it. Or better: If there's no claimant, there's no judge. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 19:06:00 +0100, HB-GRAL wrote in message 4d5d6388.1040...@sablonier.ch: Am 17.02.11 18:30, schrieb Gene Lege: As I am sure many other people will point out, fair use is a specific provision of copyright law - it has absolutely nothing to do with trademark law. It looks like Red Bull has licenses to use their trademark for Apps and Games. An example for this is Red Bull Motocross: Created developed by Xendex. © 2010 Xendex Holding GmbH. All Rights Reserved. Xendex is a registered trademark of Xendex Holding GmbH. Published by Digital Chocolate. www.digitalchocolate.com © 2010 Digital Chocolate. All Rights Reserved. The RED BULL trademark, the RED BULL Device trademark and Double Bull Device are trademarks of Red Bull GmbH/Austria and used under license. Red Bull GmbH/Austria reserves all rights therein and unauthorized uses are prohibited. When a company has licenses for the use of trademark in software and has also such a marketing strategy maybe we should really care? ..we could ask Debian Legal, if Red Bull's license flies under DFSG ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Free_Software_Guidelines ) then we are ok, otherwise Debian will kick FG out of Main and either into non-free or _out_. ..e.g. Mozilla's trademark policy on Firefox, is non-DFSG, so it is forked and stripped of trademarks, as Iceweasel. http://www.debian.org/legal/ http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/ ..and, how does Debian deal with abuse of Debian's own logo?: ;o) http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2010/11/msg00056.html -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Curt wrote: So why aren't we *removing* all our existing uses of the redbull logo ... or at least the ones that I can find in 2 seconds? None of the people who are saying Jack can't submit his helicopter with a redbull livery are saying anything about the 2 aircraft and several scenery database models that clearly also use the redbull logo and have existed in our sim for years. IMO we should do just that (and they shouldn't have been included in the first place). I had forgotten about them when I wrote my first email on this subject, otherwise I would have suggested they be removed as well. We should be consistent. However given that there us such disagreement on this subject I'm not going to unilaterally remove them. I think by far the best option is to wait to see what comes out of the request that someone on the forums made to RB. Assuming they reply that will provide clarification one way or the other. This smells strongly of a case where we like our policy better when it's applied to others and not ourselves. I'm not saying there isn't some logical explanation that I'm totally missing, I'm just saying what it smells like to me. Yes, you've said so twice. I think I've answered why I do not think that is the case and given an explicit example where the same standards have been applied to my own work. I'd like to think that you had a slightly higher opinion of my motives :) I have a policy of always assuming the best of intentions in others, even if I disagree with them. It's a great way to avoid getting worked up about things. -Stuart -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Stuart Buchanan Snip ... However given that there us such disagreement on this subject I'm not going to unilaterally remove them. I should think not! Vivian -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Although Flight Gear is a 'not for profit', there are at least a couple of 'businesses' (ProFlightSimulator FlightProSimulator) that use FGS's software as their core including aircraft and world map. And, since those companies are in the 'for profit' realm, certain companies that are really serious about trademark infringement might consider going after them and, by association, come after FGS precisely because FGS software is the core of their product(s). Just a thought. Regards, Duane -Original Message- From: Stuart Buchanan [mailto:stuar...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 5:29 PM To: FlightGear developers discussions Cc: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request Curt wrote: So why aren't we *removing* all our existing uses of the redbull logo ... or at least the ones that I can find in 2 seconds? None of the people who are saying Jack can't submit his helicopter with a redbull livery are saying anything about the 2 aircraft and several scenery database models that clearly also use the redbull logo and have existed in our sim for years. IMO we should do just that (and they shouldn't have been included in the first place). I had forgotten about them when I wrote my first email on this subject, otherwise I would have suggested they be removed as well. We should be consistent. However given that there us such disagreement on this subject I'm not going to unilaterally remove them. I think by far the best option is to wait to see what comes out of the request that someone on the forums made to RB. Assuming they reply that will provide clarification one way or the other. This smells strongly of a case where we like our policy better when it's applied to others and not ourselves. I'm not saying there isn't some logical explanation that I'm totally missing, I'm just saying what it smells like to me. Yes, you've said so twice. I think I've answered why I do not think that is the case and given an explicit example where the same standards have been applied to my own work. I'd like to think that you had a slightly higher opinion of my motives :) I have a policy of always assuming the best of intentions in others, even if I disagree with them. It's a great way to avoid getting worked up about things. -Stuart -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
This is getting ludicrous. I guess there won't be complaints about The Forum anymore. Move on, before you kill FG by removing all content that encourages someone to use it. There are other discussions more worthy of your expertise. Beating this one over and over again will only drive each of you further away from the reason you're here. Curt said it, Gene said it, others stated it. FG uses logos, it's part of the environment. It's part of the texture world. Curt's not worried about any issues arising from it, take some comfort there and leave it be. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
I've been lurking on this discussion, and feel a need to add my $0.02. If there is a question over the legality of the use of certain trademarked logo's, why not ask the copyright holder(s)? Rather that than waste time on a pointless debate where the arguments either way are speculative at best... Frankly flightgear is a mature project that has been around a long time, and during that time has certainly made available any number of textured models displaying copyrighted logos etc. That no copyright holder has asked the team to remove any of those logos yet tells me that perhaps as a not-for-profit community based enterprise we're not considered a target for copyright enforcement. But again, only the copyright holders can clarify that with us with any certainty... Regards, Chris Wilkinson, YBBN/BNE. From: Duane Andre beanere...@gmail.com To: FlightGear developers discussions flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Fri, 18 February, 2011 10:07:10 AM Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request Although Flight Gear is a 'not for profit', there are at least a couple of 'businesses' (ProFlightSimulator FlightProSimulator) that use FGS's software as their core including aircraft and world map. And, since those companies are in the 'for profit' realm, certain companies that are really serious about trademark infringement might consider going after them and, by association, come after FGS precisely because FGS software is the core of their product(s). Just a thought. Regards, Duane -Original Message- From: Stuart Buchanan [mailto:stuar...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 5:29 PM To: FlightGear developers discussions Cc: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request Curt wrote: So why aren't we *removing* all our existing uses of the redbull logo ... or at least the ones that I can find in 2 seconds? None of the people who are saying Jack can't submit his helicopter with a redbull livery are saying anything about the 2 aircraft and several scenery database models that clearly also use the redbull logo and have existed in our sim for years. IMO we should do just that (and they shouldn't have been included in the first place). I had forgotten about them when I wrote my first email on this subject, otherwise I would have suggested they be removed as well. We should be consistent. However given that there us such disagreement on this subject I'm not going to unilaterally remove them. I think by far the best option is to wait to see what comes out of the request that someone on the forums made to RB. Assuming they reply that will provide clarification one way or the other. This smells strongly of a case where we like our policy better when it's applied to others and not ourselves. I'm not saying there isn't some logical explanation that I'm totally missing, I'm just saying what it smells like to me. Yes, you've said so twice. I think I've answered why I do not think that is the case and given an explicit example where the same standards have been applied to my own work. I'd like to think that you had a slightly higher opinion of my motives :) I have a policy of always assuming the best of intentions in others, even if I disagree with them. It's a great way to avoid getting worked up about things. -Stuart -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
PodaVhone issue: http://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=56can=1q=vodaphone Tips: #1 don't mention the brand name as you are are aware of it and thus intentional.. (or patents) Sorry, but I have worked in this area and they are out to kill as interest is held... Flightgear needs to avoid them completely, unless - we have permission To have permission we need someone/something/entity to have agreement with.. Indeed PJ is very handy, my dream would be she could represent FG, lots of choclates and free flights imagined.. pete -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On 2/15/2011 8:27 PM, Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:50:36 -0800, Jack wrote in message 72e5b800-d213-466d-bf46-c3d33d4ae...@gmail.com: Hi, The Red Bull livery has been removed from this release. Download: http://jackmermod.bplaced.net/Files/cobra21511.zip I find it ridiculous and a bit immature how Oliver people whine about a simple logo. If Oliver really cared about preventing fictitious lawsuits as he claims to, he would concentrate his efforts on the several red bull logos that are already in our database. .._where_? If this thread is further interfered with, I will be forced to result to more forceful methods of having my work committed, or I may very well change the license back to the CC license and our community will have missed out on a very high quality aircraft. Regards, Jack ..now, imagine where _we_ would have been if tSCOG _had_ a case against Big Blue. You would have had to pay tSCOG US $1499 (or whatever it was) for every thread in your cpu. They were targeting GPL code, and the GPL itself, as anti-American. ..even as we celebrate the approaching conclusion of: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110215183557939 in http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20040319041857760 it is _just_ a side show. http://groklaw.net/ has waaay more. Jack, You know who takes trademark law seriously? Trademark owners. An owner must protect their trademarks from being used in ways that decrease the value to them. This tends to be two areas, one very specific and the other kind of broad. The first thing they must protect against is their trademark becoming generic; if everyone refers to an adhesive bandage as a Band-Aid, then Johnson and Johnson, who owns that trademark, runs the risk of losing the exclusive use of it. In fact, they made their advertising jingle many years ago to include stuck on Band-Aid brand as a very public way of asserting their ownership of the brand. Did you know Otis Elevator company came up with and trademarked the name escalator? They did not actively (enough) assert their ownership of that trademark and have lost any rights of exclusivity to it. It is now a generic term that any company can use to refer to stairs that move or anything else, for that matter. In these cases, it is an *urgent* obligation of the trademark owner to sue the pants off of any infringer. The remaining broad category is your trademark being used in any other way that decreases its value to you. This can be using it to refer to products or things it isn't intended to be associated with, removing the focus from the owner's product(s). Worse are cases where a trademark is used in ways that are harmful to the image of the owner or the owner's products. A hopefully imaginary example here might be the questionable marketing practices of certain people who are selling FlightGear to the public. Hell, even *we* don't want to be associated with them... why would Red Bull (tm) like it any better? They have much more to lose, in terms of gross dollars, than anyone here does if their trademarks were to become associated with misbehavior. So, you might say, let them go after ProSimFraud if they are misbehaving. The ProFraudSimulator people would simply point to FlightGear and say, hey this is Open Source and *they* did it! This topic has come up here before and I even checked with American Airlines about use of their logos/trademarks. Their answer was dense legal talk that I roughly translated to mean we realize we can't stop everybody from using our logos, but boy howdy, we have the right to kick your ass in court if you do it and tick us off! How is open source Red Hat Enterprise different from open source CentOS? Trademarks. The words Red Hat and any logos owned by them are completely removed by the CentOS group, leaving the only encumbrances those obligations covered by the GPL. It's kind of neat that you can take a Red Hat installation, point it to a CentOS repository instead of the Red Hat network and have it install updates. When the updates are complete, Ta dah! You now have a CentOS branded installation. Back on point, Red Hat differentiates its products by the services they provide and the *trademarks* that they own. Sure, you can use their operating system code freely, but not their services or *trademarks*. Like American Airlines, they have the right to kick your ass in court for doing so. If the Red Bull were to get litigious on us, they'd have to put some names on the law suit. There isn't a FlightGear Foundation or any single entity responsible for FG, so right at the top of the list would be names near and dear to us, starting with Curtis Olson. The list of defendants would probably include anyone else identified as being responsible for the infringement, such as whoever committed the livery to git and whoever participated in releasing the
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
I hate to wade into mud wrestling matches. But for every one who is on their high horse about being pristine in our non-use of any possible trademarked items ... have you browsed through our aircraft? We have liveries from just about every airline imaginable, past and present. What I don't like to hear is arguments along the line of: person A can't submit anything that could ever possibly be a trademark infraction by anyone's estimation, but person B we will let get away with it. Oh and by the way, we really should go through our repository and clean out any possible trademark infringements ... maybe some day. First of all this smacks of targeting or interpreting our policy differently for different people... and that usually is done on the basis of some other agenda. Maybe the person in question has invited some of this, maybe they haven't, but applying our policies in different measures to different people can quickly get petty and immature. Second, saying that oh I wish we'd retroactively fix our repository to honor this policy perfectly, and then doing nothing about it also is really weak. It sounds good on the face of it, but at the end of the day what matters is action, not words. I think it's pretty accepted that flight simulators can reproduce company liveries in the process of realistically modeling the world. I know that has been widely debated (AA, et. al) but the reality is that people are creating liveries of all kinds of companies all the time. Where do we draw the lines? Is it ok to reproduce an airline livery, but not some other company livery? As far as I can tell the people arguing that we can't have a red bull logo are on really shaky ground from a consistency perspective. Do you want to argue this from a legal standpoint? Do we only include anything that we have written permission from the original company to use? In that case probably we'll have to rip out half of our simulator. How far do we want to take it? Do you think aircraft manufacturers have given us explicit permission to replicate their designs? Aircraft systems and cockpit displays? Tire manufacturers? ACME rivet company? I've got nothing on file from them. Building shapes and names and logos? If we have to get written permssion to replicate anything, then we might as well pack it all up and go home, as should every other simulator developer. I only wade in because this whole thing smacks of a pissing match and I get strong indication that our policies are being selectively interpreted by some to gain an advantage in this stupid pissing match and not for the benefit and quality and safety of the FlightGear project itself. Thank you, Curt. On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Reagan Thomas wrote: On 2/15/2011 8:27 PM, Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:50:36 -0800, Jack wrote in message 72e5b800-d213-466d-bf46-c3d33d4ae...@gmail.com: Hi, The Red Bull livery has been removed from this release. Download: http://jackmermod.bplaced.net/Files/cobra21511.zip I find it ridiculous and a bit immature how Oliver people whine about a simple logo. If Oliver really cared about preventing fictitious lawsuits as he claims to, he would concentrate his efforts on the several red bull logos that are already in our database. .._where_? If this thread is further interfered with, I will be forced to result to more forceful methods of having my work committed, or I may very well change the license back to the CC license and our community will have missed out on a very high quality aircraft. Regards, Jack ..now, imagine where _we_ would have been if tSCOG _had_ a case against Big Blue. You would have had to pay tSCOG US $1499 (or whatever it was) for every thread in your cpu. They were targeting GPL code, and the GPL itself, as anti-American. ..even as we celebrate the approaching conclusion of: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110215183557939 in http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20040319041857760 it is _just_ a side show. http://groklaw.net/ has waaay more. Jack, You know who takes trademark law seriously? Trademark owners. An owner must protect their trademarks from being used in ways that decrease the value to them. This tends to be two areas, one very specific and the other kind of broad. The first thing they must protect against is their trademark becoming generic; if everyone refers to an adhesive bandage as a Band-Aid, then Johnson and Johnson, who owns that trademark, runs the risk of losing the exclusive use of it. In fact, they made their advertising jingle many years ago to include stuck on Band-Aid brand as a very public way of asserting their ownership of the brand. Did you know Otis Elevator company came up with and trademarked the name escalator? They did not actively (enough) assert their ownership of that trademark and have lost any rights of exclusivity to
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Re: Red Bull. One could ask for forgiveness rather than permission. But, another approach might be to go directly to Red Bull for permission to use their trademark in return for free advertising for them. I don't know how several RC aircraft makers 'solved' this issue. There are several RC aircraft with the Red Bull livery in addition to several other trademarked liveries. However, one never really knows how lawyers will react on a case by case basis. Regards, Duane -Original Message- From: Reagan Thomas [mailto:thomas...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 10:12 AM To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request On 2/15/2011 8:27 PM, Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:50:36 -0800, Jack wrote in message 72e5b800-d213-466d-bf46-c3d33d4ae...@gmail.com: Hi, The Red Bull livery has been removed from this release. Download: http://jackmermod.bplaced.net/Files/cobra21511.zip I find it ridiculous and a bit immature how Oliver people whine about a simple logo. If Oliver really cared about preventing fictitious lawsuits as he claims to, he would concentrate his efforts on the several red bull logos that are already in our database. .._where_? If this thread is further interfered with, I will be forced to result to more forceful methods of having my work committed, or I may very well change the license back to the CC license and our community will have missed out on a very high quality aircraft. Regards, Jack ..now, imagine where _we_ would have been if tSCOG _had_ a case against Big Blue. You would have had to pay tSCOG US $1499 (or whatever it was) for every thread in your cpu. They were targeting GPL code, and the GPL itself, as anti-American. ..even as we celebrate the approaching conclusion of: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110215183557939 in http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20040319041857760 it is _just_ a side show. http://groklaw.net/ has waaay more. Jack, You know who takes trademark law seriously? Trademark owners. An owner must protect their trademarks from being used in ways that decrease the value to them. This tends to be two areas, one very specific and the other kind of broad. The first thing they must protect against is their trademark becoming generic; if everyone refers to an adhesive bandage as a Band-Aid, then Johnson and Johnson, who owns that trademark, runs the risk of losing the exclusive use of it. In fact, they made their advertising jingle many years ago to include stuck on Band-Aid brand as a very public way of asserting their ownership of the brand. Did you know Otis Elevator company came up with and trademarked the name escalator? They did not actively (enough) assert their ownership of that trademark and have lost any rights of exclusivity to it. It is now a generic term that any company can use to refer to stairs that move or anything else, for that matter. In these cases, it is an *urgent* obligation of the trademark owner to sue the pants off of any infringer. The remaining broad category is your trademark being used in any other way that decreases its value to you. This can be using it to refer to products or things it isn't intended to be associated with, removing the focus from the owner's product(s). Worse are cases where a trademark is used in ways that are harmful to the image of the owner or the owner's products. A hopefully imaginary example here might be the questionable marketing practices of certain people who are selling FlightGear to the public. Hell, even *we* don't want to be associated with them... why would Red Bull (tm) like it any better? They have much more to lose, in terms of gross dollars, than anyone here does if their trademarks were to become associated with misbehavior. So, you might say, let them go after ProSimFraud if they are misbehaving. The ProFraudSimulator people would simply point to FlightGear and say, hey this is Open Source and *they* did it! This topic has come up here before and I even checked with American Airlines about use of their logos/trademarks. Their answer was dense legal talk that I roughly translated to mean we realize we can't stop everybody from using our logos, but boy howdy, we have the right to kick your ass in court if you do it and tick us off! How is open source Red Hat Enterprise different from open source CentOS? Trademarks. The words Red Hat and any logos owned by them are completely removed by the CentOS group, leaving the only encumbrances those obligations covered by the GPL. It's kind of neat that you can take a Red Hat installation, point it to a CentOS repository instead of the Red Hat network and have it install updates. When the updates are complete, Ta dah! You now have a CentOS branded installation. Back on point, Red Hat differentiates its products by the services
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Hi Curt, At the risk of being a case of if the hat fits On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: I hate to wade into mud wrestling matches. But for every one who is on their high horse about being pristine in our non-use of any possible trademarked items ... have you browsed through our aircraft? We have liveries from just about every airline imaginable, past and present. Yes, and as I said in the other post (which crossed in the ether with yours), I personally think that's a mistake and a legal risk (albeit a small one). What I don't like to hear is arguments along the line of: person A can't submit anything that could ever possibly be a trademark infraction by anyone's estimation, but person B we will let get away with it. Oh and by the way, we really should go through our repository and clean out any possible trademark infringements ... maybe some day. First of all this smacks of targeting or interpreting our policy differently for different people... and that usually is done on the basis of some other agenda. Maybe the person in question has invited some of this, maybe they haven't, but applying our policies in different measures to different people can quickly get petty and immature. I don't think I am holding Jack's work to a higher standard than anyone else here, though other committers may have different standards to me. As mentioned on the other post, I'm applying the same standards I've applied to my own work based on discussions on this list: http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg13303.html (Oh, that brings back memories - we were all so young, a new aircraft was a big deal, CVS) Melchior's comment is an interesting one, but I've no idea if it has any legal basis. Second, saying that oh I wish we'd retroactively fix our repository to honor this policy perfectly, and then doing nothing about it also is really weak. It sounds good on the face of it, but at the end of the day what matters is action, not words. It might also lead to a commit war, which would be bad. I'd much prefer a clear policy at a project level and then consistency with that policy. At present I don't think we have a policy - though it's possible that my experience with the Pitts is an exception and we are quite happy to use trademarks in the data package. It sounds like your view is that including trademarks in the data repository is perfectly OK. Correct? If that's the case and the majority of devs agree then I'll bite my tongue, though like Melchior I won't commit it myself. I think it's pretty accepted that flight simulators can reproduce company liveries in the process of realistically modeling the world. I know that has been widely debated (AA, et. al) but the reality is that people are creating liveries of all kinds of companies all the time. Where do we draw the lines? Is it ok to reproduce an airline livery, but not some other company livery? As far as I can tell the people arguing that we can't have a red bull logo are on really shaky ground from a consistency perspective. See my post which crossed with yours. I think where there is precedent we're (relatively) OK. the danger lies in trademarks that have not been used regularly within simulators and which have litigious owners. Do you want to argue this from a legal standpoint? Do we only include anything that we have written permission from the original company to use? In that case probably we'll have to rip out half of our simulator. How far do we want to take it? Do you think aircraft manufacturers have given us explicit permission to replicate their designs? Aircraft systems and cockpit displays? Tire manufacturers? ACME rivet company? I've got nothing on file from them. Building shapes and names and logos? If we have to get written permssion to replicate anything, then we might as well pack it all up and go home, as should every other simulator developer. There is a legal difference between objects/copyright and trademarks which is important. We could fairly easily have aircraft liveries and buildings that do not infringe trademarks. I only wade in because this whole thing smacks of a pissing match and I get strong indication that our policies are being selectively interpreted by some to gain an advantage in this stupid pissing match and not for the benefit and quality and safety of the FlightGear project itself. I don't think there's much of a pissing match going on here - I encouraged Jack to release his AH-1 under the GPL and committed the original version to git, so to suggest I have an axe to grind is mistaken. I admit I'm being paranoid here, and that there is a gray area. However, I think it is a good idea to air these issues on the list. -Stuart -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Stuart Buchanan Hi Curt, At the risk of being a case of if the hat fits On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: I hate to wade into mud wrestling matches. But for every one who is on their high horse about being pristine in our non-use of any possible trademarked items ... have you browsed through our aircraft? We have liveries from just about every airline imaginable, past and present. Yes, and as I said in the other post (which crossed in the ether with yours), I personally think that's a mistake and a legal risk (albeit a small one). What I don't like to hear is arguments along the line of: person A can't submit anything that could ever possibly be a trademark infraction by anyone's estimation, but person B we will let get away with it. Oh and by the way, we really should go through our repository and clean out any possible trademark infringements ... maybe some day. First of all this smacks of targeting or interpreting our policy differently for different people... and that usually is done on the basis of some other agenda. Maybe the person in question has invited some of this, maybe they haven't, but applying our policies in different measures to different people can quickly get petty and immature. I don't think I am holding Jack's work to a higher standard than anyone else here, though other committers may have different standards to me. As mentioned on the other post, I'm applying the same standards I've applied to my own work based on discussions on this list: http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear- de...@lists.sourceforge.net/msg13303.html (Oh, that brings back memories - we were all so young, a new aircraft was a big deal, CVS) Melchior's comment is an interesting one, but I've no idea if it has any legal basis. Second, saying that oh I wish we'd retroactively fix our repository to honor this policy perfectly, and then doing nothing about it also is really weak. It sounds good on the face of it, but at the end of the day what matters is action, not words. It might also lead to a commit war, which would be bad. I'd much prefer a clear policy at a project level and then consistency with that policy. At present I don't think we have a policy - though it's possible that my experience with the Pitts is an exception and we are quite happy to use trademarks in the data package. It sounds like your view is that including trademarks in the data repository is perfectly OK. Correct? If that's the case and the majority of devs agree then I'll bite my tongue, though like Melchior I won't commit it myself. I think it's pretty accepted that flight simulators can reproduce company liveries in the process of realistically modeling the world. I know that has been widely debated (AA, et. al) but the reality is that people are creating liveries of all kinds of companies all the time. Where do we draw the lines? Is it ok to reproduce an airline livery, but not some other company livery? As far as I can tell the people arguing that we can't have a red bull logo are on really shaky ground from a consistency perspective. See my post which crossed with yours. I think where there is precedent we're (relatively) OK. the danger lies in trademarks that have not been used regularly within simulators and which have litigious owners. Do you want to argue this from a legal standpoint? Do we only include anything that we have written permission from the original company to use? In that case probably we'll have to rip out half of our simulator. How far do we want to take it? Do you think aircraft manufacturers have given us explicit permission to replicate their designs? Aircraft systems and cockpit displays? Tire manufacturers? ACME rivet company? I've got nothing on file from them. Building shapes and names and logos? If we have to get written permssion to replicate anything, then we might as well pack it all up and go home, as should every other simulator developer. There is a legal difference between objects/copyright and trademarks which is important. We could fairly easily have aircraft liveries and buildings that do not infringe trademarks. I only wade in because this whole thing smacks of a pissing match and I get strong indication that our policies are being selectively interpreted by some to gain an advantage in this stupid pissing match and not for the benefit and quality and safety of the FlightGear project itself. I don't think there's much of a pissing match going on here - I encouraged Jack to release his AH-1 under the GPL and committed the original version to git, so to suggest I have an axe to grind is mistaken. I admit I'm being paranoid here, and that there is a gray area. However, I think it is a good idea to air these issues on the list. Curt has it right. Get real guys. No one is
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Hi, Curt has it right. Get real guys. No one is going to sue a non-existent organization with no assets. The worst they will do is tell us to desist. Which we will do of course. If you want to remove or alter almost every livery in our inventory, fork the data in git and go right ahead ... Vivian Red Bull is an austrian company, and very famous among RC-model-fans. In many german forums I found discussion about using their logo. And really many people there told that they are told by RedBull not to use their logos and marks. There have been even some people which have been sued by RedBull. And I'm sure they find their way to sue the author if they want to do it! And indeed it would be better to keep off the hands- I do know that one of their active heli-acrobatic pilots is quite aware of the Project FlightGear. Ask RedBull if we may use, if not- well, there are other nice liveries out there waiting to be made. Cheers Heiko -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 20:05:41 + (GMT), Heiko wrote in message 59953.21793...@web29501.mail.ird.yahoo.com: Hi, Curt has it right. Get real guys. No one is going to sue a non-existent organization with no assets. The worst they will do is tell us to desist. Which we will do of course. If you want to remove or alter almost every livery in our inventory, fork the data in git and go right ahead ... Vivian Red Bull is an austrian company, and very famous among RC-model-fans. In many german forums I found discussion about using their logo. And really many people there told that they are told by RedBull not to use their logos and marks. There have been even some people which have been sued by RedBull. And I'm sure they find their way to sue the author if they want to do it! And indeed it would be better to keep off the hands- I do know that one of their active heli-acrobatic pilots is quite aware of the Project FlightGear. Ask RedBull if we may use, if not- well, there are other nice liveries out there waiting to be made. ..a way to sell them on the idea, is do 2 sim scenario videos on air show concepts they could do, or show off FG as a training and familiarization etc sim tool. One video with Red Bull, the other with Red Bull's _Nice_ Competitor. ;o) ..mention It probably needs the Board's Approval. ;o) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Hey everyone, Based on my (brief) reading of some United States statutes, I would suggest we can continue using these trademarks until asked not to do so. I don't think this will bring forth a lawsuit, most likely a cease and desist action which is easily complied with, if it is on trademark grounds. However I would definitely suggest whenever we do use trademarks we should publish a notice we are not affiliated, connected, or associated with the companies whose trademarks we use. I think we should also be cautious of the screenshots we use to advertise the software. See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_1125000-.html#a I am not a lawyer and this is not a legal opinion. Yours John Holden -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
To throw something into the mix here: I've actually got experience of dealing with RedBull regarding the use of their logos and IP in Flight Simulation. Several years ago I contacted them for an old Payware project and they were most supportive, provided an email stating that as long as nowhere we claimed that they endorsed the product then they saw it all as good publicity. I'm sure they'd do something similar here, as would many companies. In fact there is only two companies that I'm aware of, who have caused issues in the FS community, that was a large American airline who requested a VA stop using their name, and got quite aggressive about it, and a well known Bizjet manufacturer who flatly refuse to grant any permission for any of their aircraft to be represented, and will go to great lengths to stop people making a product out of it. There's lots of history of probably most Aviation related companies being contacted by FlightSimulation enthusiasts/3rd party developers/ etc over the past few years and getting very positive results for doing so, in some cases huge gains as well. Alex On 16 Feb 2011, at 21:07, J. Holden wrote: Hey everyone, Based on my (brief) reading of some United States statutes, I would suggest we can continue using these trademarks until asked not to do so. I don't think this will bring forth a lawsuit, most likely a cease and desist action which is easily complied with, if it is on trademark grounds. However I would definitely suggest whenever we do use trademarks we should publish a notice we are not affiliated, connected, or associated with the companies whose trademarks we use. I think we should also be cautious of the screenshots we use to advertise the software. See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_1125000-.html#a I am not a lawyer and this is not a legal opinion. Yours John Holden -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Hi, To throw something into the mix here: I've actually got experience of dealing with RedBull regarding the use of their logos and IP in Flight Simulation. Several years ago I contacted them for an old Payware project and they were most supportive, provided an email stating that as long as nowhere we claimed that they endorsed the product then they saw it all as good publicity. According to many RC-forums, they don't do this anymore as they licenced their stuff to Third parties. So if a single, simple man wants to paint his aircraft into RD-colors, he is in the risk to be sued. But your example shows one special thing: ask, and wait to see what they say. I'm sure they'd do something similar here, as would many companies. No as they licences their logos and colors to certain third parties. If you don't belong to them: Good Luck! In fact there is only two companies that I'm aware of, who have caused issues in the FS community, that was a large American airline who requested a VA stop using their name, and got quite aggressive about it, and a well known Bizjet manufacturer who flatly refuse to grant any permission for any of their aircraft to be represented, and will go to great lengths to stop people making a product out of it. No, regarding VA's several airlines and companies more: Lufthansa, AirBerlin, ADAC, DRF... But Condor, REGA and some others gave permission under certain circumstances. There's lots of history of probably most Aviation related companies being contacted by FlightSimulation enthusiasts/3rd party developers/ etc over the past few years and getting very positive results for doing so, in some cases huge gains as well. Yep, but depends on. I still wait for an answer by Eurocopter and Erricson AirCrane.On the other side The developer of the AutoGyro Hornet even gave us a 3d-model right of his CAD-program ;-) Heiko -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
Hi, Technically, all these logos are under trademark: http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/737-100/Models/Liveries/731CA.png;h=43cfc5a15abb392519e1f95d34951d410d3c3c80;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/737-100/Models/Liveries/731continw.png;h=2c7854e28f50ebfd270551fea6ee17c161ca56a6;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/747-400/Models/Liveries/KLM.png;h=fb5a5e15737ff7d45cb4b6c4ecae1c664221fd4c;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/ACA.png;h=24cab3acc9be66ffa819d4b86b3d269d6c5c146d;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/AFR.png;h=feb509950de44037ee2ffe72d99e803820f2078c;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/ANZ.png;h=6ac933fa22c33e0f0b637c032cdc473108fee367;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/AUA.png;h=6fa2d4d95c4e614bb67ba3514a09d60b253e45d7;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/BAW.png;h=c13d743667bf7de26df391ee1baf6627f012ae9b;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/UAL.png;h=5c93dbbe501aa1a44adbaeac305e4a637ff8adec;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/777-200/Models/DAL-Livery.png;h=e516842b15c4cd8e42c3f20dd2bbd9e1cfcebb8e;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/777-200/Models/KLM.png;h=76ca78871b1b5cd58eb0533aefc91eb63b5e7149;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ec135/Models/fuselage.adac.png;h=effa8b73133ad6991dc615ea670b5a3db58dcc0e;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ec135/Models/fuselage.anwb.png;h=f4ca4abcc551aeca443ca68b06f60006ef84af12;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ZivkoEdge/Models/Liveries/Fuselage-RedBull.png;h=4af09d1cb79a04528b824447190bc68e809ecceb;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ZivkoEdge/Models/Liveries/WingTail-RedBull.png;h=592707498df5f8f923b2c9da1f3e9a68370ddd7e;hb=HEAD http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/Zlin-50lx/Models/Liveries/red-bull.png;h=d60378d6af8635efc3f5b15a1345e2a810f65fcb;hb=HEAD I can dish out links all day if I have to And go ahead, get them removed. ;) You know what you'll have accomplished when you're finished? You'll have deleted hundreds of hours of work, all in paranoia of a lawsuit that will never happen. Unless you wish to delete nearly all our liveries, all of you that do not wish for my work to be committed are being well, hypocrites. On the subject of my AH-1; I have removed the content for now, what other hoops do you want me to jump through? I'd like to see somebody commit it relatively soon, so my (somewhat) recent work can be included in the release. Check Six, Jack-- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
i doubt...have a look at FSX. Even commercial products alike xtraffic etc use such liveries. --- On Thu, 2/17/11, Jack Mermod jackmer...@gmail.com wrote: From: Jack Mermod jackmer...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request To: Devel List flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Thursday, February 17, 2011, 3:45 AM Hi, Technically, all these logos are under trademark: http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/737-100/Models/Liveries/731CA.png;h=43cfc5a15abb392519e1f95d34951d410d3c3c80;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/737-100/Models/Liveries/731continw.png;h=2c7854e28f50ebfd270551fea6ee17c161ca56a6;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/747-400/Models/Liveries/KLM.png;h=fb5a5e15737ff7d45cb4b6c4ecae1c664221fd4c;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/ACA.png;h=24cab3acc9be66ffa819d4b86b3d269d6c5c146d;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/AFR.png;h=feb509950de44037ee2ffe72d99e803820f2078c;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/ANZ.png;h=6ac933fa22c33e0f0b637c032cdc473108fee367;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/AUA.png;h=6fa2d4d95c4e614bb67b a3514a09d60b253e45d7;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/BAW.png;h=c13d743667bf7de26df391ee1baf6627f012ae9b;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/767-300/Models/UAL.png;h=5c93dbbe501aa1a44adbaeac305e4a637ff8adec;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/777-200/Models/DAL-Livery.png;h=e516842b15c4cd8e42c3f20dd2bbd9e1cfcebb8e;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/777-200/Models/KLM.png;h=76ca78871b1b5cd58eb0533aefc91eb63b5e7149;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ec135/Models/fuselage.adac.png;h=effa8b73133ad6991dc615ea670b5a3db58dcc0e;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ec135/Models/fuselage.anwb.png;h=f4ca4abcc551aeca443ca68b06f60006ef84af12;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ZivkoEdge/Models/Liveries/Fuse lage-RedBull.png;h=4af09d1cb79a04528b824447190bc68e809ecceb;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/ZivkoEdge/Models/Liveries/WingTail-RedBull.png;h=592707498df5f8f923b2c9da1f3e9a68370ddd7e;hb=HEADhttp://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/?p=fgdata;a=blob;f=Aircraft/Zlin-50lx/Models/Liveries/red-bull.png;h=d60378d6af8635efc3f5b15a1345e2a810f65fcb;hb=HEAD I can dish out links all day if I have to And go ahead, get them removed. ;) You know what you'll have accomplished when you're finished? You'll have deleted hundreds of hours of work, all in paranoia of a lawsuit that will never happen. Unless you wish to delete nearly all our liveries, all of you that do not wish for my work to be committed are being well, hypocrites. On the subject of my AH-1; I have removed the content for now, what other hoops do you want me to jump through? I'd like to see somebody commit it relatively soon, so my (somewhat) recent work can be included in the release. Check Six, Jack -Inline Attachment Follows- -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb -Inline Attachment Follows- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] ..IP and litigation risks, was: AH-1 Merge Request
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:50:36 -0800, Jack wrote in message 72e5b800-d213-466d-bf46-c3d33d4ae...@gmail.com: Hi, The Red Bull livery has been removed from this release. Download: http://jackmermod.bplaced.net/Files/cobra21511.zip I find it ridiculous and a bit immature how Oliver people whine about a simple logo. If Oliver really cared about preventing fictitious lawsuits as he claims to, he would concentrate his efforts on the several red bull logos that are already in our database. .._where_? If this thread is further interfered with, I will be forced to result to more forceful methods of having my work committed, or I may very well change the license back to the CC license and our community will have missed out on a very high quality aircraft. Regards, Jack ..as you may know, we're not Big Blue, and Big Blue is still here: http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20031016162215566 ..in 18 days, this _bullshit_ case celebrates its 8'th year in US Courts. All it takes, is Big Money and Air Show Quality Litigation. ..the reason Big Blue survives, is it still _has_ Big Money. ..now, imagine where _we_ would have been if tSCOG _had_ a case against Big Blue. You would have had to pay tSCOG US $1499 (or whatever it was) for every thread in your cpu. They were targeting GPL code, and the GPL itself, as anti-American. ..even as we celebrate the approaching conclusion of: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110215183557939 in http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20040319041857760 it is _just_ a side show. http://groklaw.net/ has waaay more. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
