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 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
>
--
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
