a small question
Jonathan Wilson
head and thats why its not being used as an icon for mozilla.
My question then is:
What is wrong with using these icons?
http://www.grayrest.com/moz/icons.html
(asside from the red dino head one of course)
Is there any particular reason why these ones cant be used?
It sounds like a good solution:
1.none of the icons use anything even remotly "communist"...
2.Given that the icons and imagery was specificly created for the
mozilla project, there wouldnt be any licencing/copyright issues would
there (unlike where mozilla.org needs to protect its copyright and
trademark on the red dino head)
JTK
>
> From what I have read, mozilla.org owns the trademark on the red dino
> head and thats why its not being used as an icon for mozilla.
>
> My question then is:
> What is wrong with using these icons?
> http://www.grayrest.com/moz/icons.html
> (asside from the red dino head one of course)
> Is there any particular reason why these ones cant be used?
None whatsoever. And look how much better looking those are than the
current ones. Hell, with those added to Mozilla with just a few
thousand lines of XUL, I'd be hard-pressed to tell the UI from an
honest-to-God, real, non-interpreted-from-ASCII-text one, at least by
just looking.
> It sounds like a good solution:
> 1.none of the icons use anything even remotly "communist"...
Problem #1 right there: not commie enough.
> 2.Given that the icons and imagery was specificly created for the
> mozilla project, there wouldnt be any licencing/copyright issues would
> there (unlike where mozilla.org needs to protect its copyright and
> trademark on the red dino head)
Of course not, that's a complete Red-Communist Herring. It's not even a
valid argument with the *current* graphics: "(c) 1908-2002 AOL, Inc.",
in any font you want as long as it's Red, "problem" solved.
Just remember: Only Case could go to China.
jesus X
>
> From what I have read, mozilla.org owns the trademark on the red dino
> head and thats why its not being used as an icon for mozilla.
The problem is that there are currently no clauses in the MPL to allow
mozilla.org to keep the rights to it's trademarks without sharing them,
including the images. The lawyerbots are working (supposedly) on addressing this
for the license that accompanies the 1.0 release, allowing use of the red dino
is that package without infringing their trademark.
--
jesus X [ Booze-fueled paragon of pointless cruelty and wanton sadism. ]
email [ jesusx @ who.net ]
web [ http://www.mozillanews.org ]
tag [ The Universe: It's everywhere you want to be. ]
warning [ "I hate cats. You never know if they're dead." - E. Schrodinger ]
Jonathan Wilson
>
>The problem is that there are currently no clauses in the MPL to allow
>mozilla.org to keep the rights to it's trademarks without sharing them,
>including the images. The lawyerbots are working (supposedly) on addressing this
>for the license that accompanies the 1.0 release, allowing use of the red dino
>is that package without infringing their trademark.
>
ok, I know they cant use the dino but why not use the icons at that URL
I gave, they are BETTER (IMHO) than just using the red dino AND as far
as I can tell have no legal problems.
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.
called MacZilla has rights to a Green Dino.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112-1809 |pjo...@kimbanet.com, ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!
mailto:pjo...@kimbanet.com
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/america/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/message/default.htm>
<http://home.kimbanet.com/~pjones/birthday/index.htm>
Sören Kuklau
> can't use a green dino. A company that makes a plugin for Communicator
> called MacZilla has rights to a Green Dino.
You can't copyright such simple stuff. I can't copyright the letter 'S'
or a pink dog either, hmm?
--
Regards,
Sören Kuklau ('Chucker')
chu...@web.de
Jonas Jørgensen
>> can't use a green dino. A company that makes a plugin for Communicator
>> called MacZilla has rights to a Green Dino.
>
> You can't copyright such simple stuff. I can't copyright the letter 'S'
> or a pink dog either, hmm?
If Intel can trademark the letter 'I', why can't some other company
copyright the letter 'S'?
(Yes, Intel really did trademark 'I'. See
<http://www.rcollins.org/Trademarks/>, category "We have enough money to
buy anything".)
--
Disclaimer: This disclaimer is not required by my employer.
This article does not necessarily represent the opinions of my employer.
This article does not necessarily disagree with my employer either.
Have a nice day!
Travis Crump
sure that Intel just has a representation of 'I' trademarked(or else why
would they be applying for another patent on the letter 'I'?). A lot of
companies do this and it doesn't mean that I can't start a computer
company and have my logo being a stylized I and trademark, it just can't
look identical to Intel's. Likewise, MacZilla doesn't have a trademark
on every green dinosaur, they merely have a trademark on their specific
representaion of a green dinosaur.
Standard IANAL disclaimer...
Sören Kuklau
> Sören Kuklau wrote:
>>> can't use a green dino. A company that makes a plugin for Communicator
>>> called MacZilla has rights to a Green Dino.
>> You can't copyright such simple stuff. I can't copyright the letter
>> 'S' or a pink dog either, hmm?
> If Intel can trademark the letter 'I'
They can't.
> , why can't some other company
> copyright the letter 'S'?
>
> (Yes, Intel really did trademark 'I'. See
> <http://www.rcollins.org/Trademarks/>, category "We have enough money to
> buy anything".)
I'm pretty sure that trademark is not valid. There is that trademark
with the emoticon (was it ";-)"?) which iirc wasn't valid either. And
then there's the "Deutsche Telekom" (German Telecom, our former
monopolist telecom company) who tried to trademark both magenta (yes,
the color. they use it all over their subsidiaries) and 'T' (big 'T'
letter, same reason), and iirc failed too.
Lucas MacBride
Microsoft has effectively patented trivial things: ;-)
http://www.theonion.com/onion3311/microsoftpatents.html
--
Tha cuid ag radh gu'm bheil e 'na shaor.
Tha cuid ag radh gu'n robh e 'na aonar.
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.
Well thought it was just said that the red Dino was copyrighted
(registered trademark then) of Mozilla?
I was just saying a Green Dino can't be used because its part of a
company called MacZilla which makes a audio plugin for Communicator.
Sorry if I misspoke this registered and copyrighted deal takes a
Philadelphia Lawyer to figure out. <g>
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.
Travis Crump wrote:
>
> There isn't much explanation at that link so I could be wrong, but I am
> sure that Intel just has a representation of 'I' trademarked(or else why
> would they be applying for another patent on the letter 'I'?). A lot of
> companies do this and it doesn't mean that I can't start a computer
> company and have my logo being a stylized I and trademark, it just can't
> look identical to Intel's. Likewise, MacZilla doesn't have a trademark
> on every green dinosaur, they merely have a trademark on their specific
> representaion of a green dinosaur.
---------------snip---------------------
well said. What i was trying to say about MacZilla's Dino but didn't
word correctly.
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.
Sören Kuklau wrote:
--------------snip------------
>
> I'm pretty sure that trademark is not valid. There is that trademark
> with the emoticon (was it ";-)"?) which iirc wasn't valid either. And
> then there's the "Deutsche Telekom" (German Telecom, our former
> monopolist telecom company) who tried to trademark both magenta (yes,
> the color. they use it all over their subsidiaries) and 'T' (big 'T'
> letter, same reason), and iirc failed too.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sören Kuklau ('Chucker')
> chu...@web.de
I suppose its because all the item you site are in what is called "the
public Domain" meaning they have existed so long that its not unique
and therefore can not be Copyrighted or registered. ???
Patrick Gallagher
>
> --------------snip------------
>
>>I'm pretty sure that trademark is not valid. There is that trademark
>>with the emoticon (was it ";-)"?) which iirc wasn't valid either. And
>>then there's the "Deutsche Telekom" (German Telecom, our former
>>monopolist telecom company) who tried to trademark both magenta (yes,
>>the color. they use it all over their subsidiaries) and 'T' (big 'T'
>>letter, same reason), and iirc failed too.
>>
>>--
>>Regards,
>>Sören Kuklau ('Chucker')
>>chu...@web.de
>>
> I suppose its because all the item you site are in what is called "the
> public Domain" meaning they have existed so long that its not unique
> and therefore can not be Copyrighted or registered. ???
>
doesn't hurt that they are all items that have prior usage - in a
trademark dispute, all you really need to prove is that something was
known and in use prior to a company trademarking it. It's unlikely that
you'll find any "prior art" for Coca-Cola, but the letter "C" was used
extensively before Coca-Cola existed. So a trademark for Coca-Cola would
be defensible, where a trademark on the letter "C" would not be. There
have been green dinosaur pictures around since before computers were
used, so it's highly unlikely that a picture of a green dinosaur alone
would be liable for any sort of trademark infringement, but the EXACT
green dinosaur could be, unless you could prove that same dinosaur
picture predated the trademark and was used before by someone other than
the company that holds the trademark - in which case, they'd lose any case.
Makes sense that Moz would hold off until they have trademarks on their
logos under a proper licence. By using the logos beforehand, they would
be providing "prior artwork" for legitimate use, and invalidating any
trademark they could receive.
Patrick
jesus X
> Well thought it was just said that the red Dino was copyrighted
> (registered trademark then) of Mozilla?
> I was just saying a Green Dino can't be used because its part of a
> company called MacZilla which makes a audio plugin for Communicator.
> Sorry if I misspoke this registered and copyrighted deal takes a
> Philadelphia Lawyer to figure out. <g>
No, MacZilla's specific Green Dino can't be used. Netscape had their green dino,
and it was never an infringement, because it wasn't the same dino. Intel has a
TM on their SPECIFIC representation of the lower case i. And while we think of
it as a TM on the I, it's really more of a TM on that specific image, which
happens to be of a specific i. Mozilla's red dino is TM and C of mozilla.org,
but not all red dinos. Other companies' red dinos won't infringe on it, etc. TM
and C law is very specific, not general as you seem to think it is. When
companies TM words, it's either a novel (new/unique) word, a specific use of the
word (intel has a TM on "intel" but only for the computer industry. There are
other companies called "intel" and "Intel" that are totally separate, and the
word "intel" is short for "intelligence" as a noun, thus separate from the
trademark), or a unique spelling. If I wanted to name a company "Television" and
TM the name, I'm screwed, but I COULD TM the name "Tellavision" or "Tellevision"
or "Tellavizhun", etc.