Re: [DISCUSS] logo usage -- nitpicking and some proposed changes

[Kay Schenk]

On 06/14/2012 01:53 PM, drew wrote:
On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 13:54 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:33 PM, drew<d...@baseanswers.com>  wrote:
On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 10:01 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:



<snip>


I did not think it correct, back to my goal, I'm thinking is to license
each piece and the whole under Creative Commons 3, No-Derivative. I
don't care about attribution and I thought about non-commercial also..

http://lo-portal.us//aoo/temp/AOO34-cd-folded-win.png

(bottom of back cover :)

so I would be using this CC3-by-nd for each piece and for the iso image
as a whole.

I think with that then , I'm comfortable actually asking the project
(and ASF) for permission to use the 'real' logo this way.

What do you think?


The problem is this.   You are not asking permission (as far as I can
tell) to distribute a CD with the given art work, along the lines of
what Hirano-san did a while back.    You are asking permission to use
the logo in artwork where others (unknown to us) would then be
downloading he artwork and would be doing the redistribution.  So even
if we did give you permission to use the logos, that permission would
not be transferred to the 3rd parties.

Expressed another way:

Your art work is a sum of three sets of rights:

1) The rights of the copyright holders of the underlying graphical
elements that you have reused.

2) Your rights to your original creation.

3) ASF's rights to control use of its trademarks.


#1 is already taken care of by the applicable license, whatever it is.

#2 is whatever you want it to be, so long as it is compatible with #1.
You determine the license you want.

#3 We can give permission for you to use the logo.  We've done that before.

But that is purely from your perspective.  What about the perspective
of the person using art work and affixing it to a CD?

#1 and #2 are OK.  Open source licenses transfer rights.  That is a
core principle.  But from trademark perspective, this is not true, so
giving you permission to use the logo doesn't help those who download
your artwork.   And I think it would be unlikely for us to grant that
permission without a set of constraints similar to what we did with
the "Get it here!" logo.

Hopefully this makes sense.

-Rob



Well given this response...more questions

Rob, are you saying,  that since some of the "artwork" on the site that
contains logo(s), whose use has been previously given; and even though
these pieces of art have already been licensed in some way allowing
perhaps for modification, that because they contain a logo (trademarked)
that people wanting to use these art pieces have to again ask permission
because of the logo inclusion?

This seems to be counter to the licenses attached to these entities to me.



Howdy Kay, Rob


Actually I don't think it is really - and in reading Rob's reply he and
I are looking at, thinking about the same difference here. This is not
the same IMO as requesting to produce a run of CD's, or a single
publisher's request. Precisely why I've been so obtuse, perhaps.

Where we (rob and I) I think diverge is what happens with the CC By-ND
license, it seems to me to fulfill the requirements needed.


OK.  I didn't notice the significance of the ND.  That might work.
But we'd need to connect the dots, e.g., the ISO is ND, and the
artwork can only be used with that ISO, etc.


Right - and why I said earlier "using this CC3-by-nd for each piece and
for the iso image as a whole."

Will stop hijacking this thread then and pop back to the thread about
the cd image with specifics and see about posting the actual email to
the PPMC/Trademark groups requesting permission to proceed in the
morning.

Thanks,

//drew


Anyone could use the files to produce a CD and then give it away, sell
it even, without any contact - but they can not legally alter anything,
I have not transfered any rights to any trademarks whatsoever, in fact
should someone contact me and ask to make alterations I would have no
right to allow them to to do so, of course they would be welcome to do
so _BUT_ that immediately means that they then need to clear the use of
the trademarks with the project directly.

Least that is how I see it.

Thanks for your feedback,

//drew




Thanks to both of you for all this enlightening information, esp the 
clause about trademarks in ALv2. I'll need to take a closer look at the 
LGPL etc to see how this is covered there. I think I have a much better 
idea of what is actually going on now, and will just drop this thread.

It would be nice to provide our users with a bit more user-friendly 
information so I will think about all this and visit in a few days.


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"There's no crying in baseball!"
       -- Jimmy Dugan (Tom Hanks), "A League of Their Own"