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