Delirium schreef:
Andrew Gray wrote:
On 10/02/07, David Monniaux David.Monniaux@free.fr wrote:
Andrew Gray a écrit :
Bear in mind that copyright is not related to your right not to have your image used in a defamatory or misleading manner - whatever rights the law gives you in this regard you retain whether you hold the copyright or not.
Actually, it is.
Proof: the Wikimedia Foundation *copyrights* its logos under *unfree licenses* exactly for that reason: for being able to control their use more effectively than through trademark law solely.
Sorry, by "your image" here I meant "the photograph of you" (ie, the image in question). Images which aren't a photographic representation of a person don't tend to be covered by these protections, hence the workarounds...
Though even there it's not clear that the workarounds are necessary or beneficial. Sun recently freely licensed the copyright on their Java mascot ("Duke"), and is controlling use exclusively through the trademark that they retain on it. Mozilla, meanwhile, has been famously tightfisted with their Firefox logo, and it has led to a great deal of rancor within the open-source/free-software community, arguably outweighing any benefit they've gained from that control.
-Mark
Hoi, There are two sides to the coin. You assume that Mozilla lost out. Maybe so, but Debian lost most of its credibility in the eyes of many others. The sheer stupidity of it all is one of the impediments that works against the uptake of Linux on the desktop. Including my desktop.
Thanks, GerardM