IANAL
On 11/16/06, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
??? Sorry. Belongs to who ? If you intend to claim I am not the author of the flower picture because it belongs to the Foundation, I think you are showing a badly twisted mind.
Trademark rights under certian contexts belong to the foundation. Since you released it into the public domain the copyright probably belongs to no one (the slightly quibble is based on the question of is it in fact posible to release your work into the public domain but that is a seperate question)
Are you realising what you are saying ?
I do not care the image is "embedded" in the logo, but the image itself has an independant life and no one has the right to strip me of my author rights on it.
You did that when you released it into the public domain. You have no control over derivatives. In this case the derivative is also in the public domain copyright wise.
It is shocking to tell me I am not allowed to choose myself under which licence an image I produced should be released simply because later it is used in a tm logo.
I think Alex is mixing up trademark law and copyright law. However tradmark does impose some limits. You would not be able to use your image to market your own brand of wiki for example.
Excuse me ?
The sunflower is NOT a symbol. It is a photo I took myself in a perfectly good sunflower field. They were 2 meters high. I had to find a way to reach the flower. Find a way to take a close up of it even though I was nearly escalating the plant. Find a way to escape the sun to have the right light. And it is to be considered generic with no author right ?
The stuff where you chose the lighting conditions would give you a solid copyright claim based on the case law I have seen. The effort to get into that position would not (the law does not appear to diffurentuate between takeing one step to the side to snap a photo and climbing up mountians in a war zone to take a photo).