David Newton wrote:
<snip: long detailed commentary>
It seems to me that it would be a good idea to get in touch with them over this matter and find out what their policy with respect to the Wikipedia is. It is nice to have good quality illustrations of the crests from the RAF Marham website, but even if they do turn out to be copyvios, we need to sort out the issues with respect to trademarks.
It seems to me that what something is used for is far more important in trademark law than in copyright law. Whatever might be said about copyright law in terms of a particular reproduction it can still be used without violating trademark law. In your material you quoted:
But any such use otherwise than in accordance with honest practices in industrial or commercial matters shall be treated as infringing the registered trade mark if the use without due cause takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark.
Unless we are using the material in direct competition with these units, or are creating confusion in the marketplace, or are pretending to be them, or are treating them unfairly in a manner that brings them into disrepute we come nowhere near to violating trademarks. Where and how do you perceive that we could be violating trademarks?
Copyright is a completely different manner.
Ec