Well, Jimbo, if you want to stand up for fair use it appears that now's your chance. :)
There seem to be around 6000 images that link to the {{logo}} template.
Regards, Haukur
I (smoddy -- this is my second email address) sent an email to User:Crosstar about fair use on a logo at [[Nationalist Movement]] and [[Crosstar]]. I received this email back in response (my original email is at the bottom).
I am forwarding the email here as I am not subscribed to the legal mailing list.
Are there any suggestions as to the course to take?
Sam/smoddy
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: crosstar nationalist@nationalist.org Date: Aug 3, 2005 4:06 AM Subject: Re: Wikipedia e-mail -- fair use To: Smoddy sam.korn@gmail.com
Dear Mr. Smoddy:
Your assessment is incorrect and far from "clear."
"Fair Use" is considered on a case-by-case basis and, even after expensive and protracted litigation, outcomes may vary. Suffice it to say, we cannot render legal-advice to you, which must come from your own, independent legal-counsel. I can tell you that in approximately thirty-seven cases involving infringement of our trademarks and violation of our copyrights, however, we have won every one.
The US Copyright Office advises that:
"The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material." http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
The courts tend to lean toward protecting intellectual-property rights, as well they should, insofar such rights are protected by the United States Constitution.
Anyone who wishes his own intellectual-property rights to be respected (and that should include all of us) should respect such rights of others. Penalties for violation are severe and increased if repeated. In the Hale case, the fine was $200,000.00, plus $450,000.00 attorney fees, alone. Punitive damages may also be assessed, where conduct is wilfull, reckless or wanton, if, for instance, the offender persists, after having been placed on notice.
In this instance, the copyright/trademark owner has not given permission for its images to be used and will vigorously defend its rights in court, if need be.
The Copyright Office further explains that:
"When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted material should be avoided...." http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
It is the choice of the copyright/trademark owner whether or not to license use of its intellectual-property and, insofar as the owner does not approve of your project and wishes to avoid any misrepresentation of itself or any implied endorsement of your project, as well as to prevent any confusion in the mind of the public, permission is denied.
There are numerous other objections, but the foregoing should suffice for purposes of your question. Thank you for your kind consideration and cooperation.
Richard Barrett Attorney The Nationalist Movement
At 12:11 PM 8/2/2005, you wrote:
May I ask that you explain why we are not allowed to display this image? Under US law, it is allowed for reference materials (and other such documents) to be shown for informational reasons about the topic. This is clearly true in this case.
I am sending you an email in the hope that you will reply.
Cheers, and best wishes
Sam/smoddy
-- Try http://en.wikipedia.org - Wikipedia - the free encyclopaedia! _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l