Mark Mills wrote:
Don't mix copyright with trademark there. Since they trademarked the
conflation of Badger and TT2 you can get in to trouble if you do the
same to promote your own, published, TT2 work. Technically, the Badger
artwork itself probably isn't even copyrighted since they tend to draw
from pre-1923 woodcut artworks for their source images. Saves them money
and gives them a trademarkable image at the same time. And the same
thing with "in a nutshell", to an extent it is a regularly used yet
rather weak trademark they employ on many of their products.
As you can probably tell I am not really that well versed on this stuff.
Patent: non-obvious and new invention listed with government.
Copyright: newly created work of art (listed with government for extra
protection).
Trademark: image or logo regularly used in conjunction with product
(listed with gov for extra protection).
Service mark: image or logo advertised when offering a service (listed
with gov for extra protection).
Patents and copyrights are time-limited (technically, anyway) in term
but grant exclusive license for that term.
Trademarks and service marks are forever but have to be defended and
used regularly or are lost.
O'Reilly has to be tough about defending their trademarks or they will
lose them. See the "Camel FAQ" at their site:
http://perl.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/perl/usage/faq.html
Sorry, it's a hot button with me.
Don't be sorry, its a lesson learnt on my part.
Harry
_______________________________________________
templates mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.template-toolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/templates
