Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 74

Thread: Is trademarking logos consistent with open sourcing software?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Israel
    Beans
    292

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    Well, I believe in sharing everything.

    I share files, I share code, I share what I eat and drink, etc.

    From my point of view, it's hypocritical of someone who makes free software, to make the logo which represents that software, not free.

    As far as the two things being different, well, I think that since the logo DOES represent the free software, it should be free as well, because it is part of it.
    The very fact it represents the free software makes it a part of it.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Beans
    3,779

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperSonic4 View Post
    No, the logo largely defines ubuntu and anything carrying the logo or something similar has the potential to do damage to ubuntu's reputation.

    Copyrighting the logo safeguards the users by making them know the ubuntu logo is ubuntu
    *claps* Thankfully, somebody got in before I did.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Tuxland
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    Quote Originally Posted by Eisenwinter View Post
    Well, I believe in sharing everything.

    I share files, I share code, I share what I eat and drink, etc.

    From my point of view, it's hypocritical of someone who makes free software, to make the logo which represents that software, not free.

    As far as the two things being different, well, I think that since the logo DOES represent the free software, it should be free as well, because it is part of it.
    The very fact it represents the free software makes it a part of it.
    I don't disagree with you at all. But do realize this forum is not FSF Central. Unfortunately of course.
    Proud GNU/Linux zealot and lover of penguins
    "Value your freedom or you will lose it, teaches history." --Richard Stallman

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Beans
    30

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    You should think carefully about the purpose of free software before crudely trying to apply the principles elsewhere. Works for practical use (software) are very different from works identifying an opinion, trade, or brand. Ever heard of the Creative Commons license, which is endorsed by the FSF? It requires attribution and (one of them, anyway) forbids derivation.

    http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/legalcode

    Basically, for identifying marks and writings that represent my opinion, ideology, or trade... if I allowed others to modify them or fail to give attribution, I could be misrepresented and my reputation harmed.

    Sharing something does not mean allowing them to change it or plagiarize.
    Last edited by adelphos; January 7th, 2010 at 07:25 PM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Israel
    Beans
    292

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    Quote Originally Posted by adelphos View Post
    Basically, for identifying marks and writings that represent my opinion, ideology, or trade... if I allowed others to modify them or fail to give attribution, I could be misrepresented and my reputation harmed.

    Sharing something does not mean allowing them to change it or plagiarize.
    I guess my world view is different.

    I, personally, would not change your writings which represent your opinion, because I know I wouldn't want it to be done to me.

    Whether or not everyone else thinks like me about this... that's a different thing.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sonoran Desert
    Beans
    276
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    I think the Ubuntu Logo needs to be copyrighted to protect the USER. If it is not copyrighted or trademarked, anyone can use it, even malicously.

    Think of this scenario. Newbie to Linux has heard of Ubuntu and wants to download a copy for herself. She types Ubuntu in Google and searches. She see's a lot of references to Ubuntu and goes to one that looks legit. It has the logo, the name, everything. However, unbenounced to her it is not what she was looking for. Because there was no trademark on the logo, someone has taken the name and graphic and used for their own purposes. So instead of Ubuntu, she got something else entirely.

    Trademarks, while not perfect by any means, help stop this type of fraud. I beleive in Free Software, but it's code that makes a machine work. Logos represent a company/organization in the marketplace. Trademarks help stop misrepresentation.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Beans
    30

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    Quote Originally Posted by Eisenwinter View Post
    I guess my world view is different.

    I, personally, would not change your writings which represent your opinion, because I know I wouldn't want it to be done to me.

    Whether or not everyone else thinks like me about this... that's a different thing.
    Right. My point is that, for software, it makes sense that people should be allowed to change it, and attribution doesn't seem necessary. After all, it's just a tool for practical use. For a logo, a paper, a book, etc that belongs to someone ese, I shouldn't be allowed to change it or claim it as my own. That could potentially hurt them. However, I should be allowed to redistribute and share it. The author shouldn't be able to hoard it and extort money from people enjoying their book or work of art. So, applying the free software principles to visual art or books... we get something like the CC licenses. This same principle applies to the Ubuntu name and logo.
    Last edited by adelphos; January 7th, 2010 at 07:38 PM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    Quote Originally Posted by Eisenwinter View Post
    Well, I believe in sharing everything.

    I share files, I share code, I share what I eat and drink, etc.

    From my point of view, it's hypocritical of someone who makes free software, to make the logo which represents that software, not free.

    As far as the two things being different, well, I think that since the logo DOES represent the free software, it should be free as well, because it is part of it.
    The very fact it represents the free software makes it a part of it.
    Will you share with me $50?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Tuxland
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    Quote Originally Posted by adelphos View Post
    Right. My point is that, for software, it makes sense that people should be allowed to change it, and attribution doesn't seem necessary. After all, it's just a tool for practical use. For a logo, a paper, a book, etc that belongs to someone ese, I shouldn't be allowed to change it or claim it as my own. That could potentially hurt them. However, I should be allowed to redistribute and share it. The author shouldn't be able to hoard it and extort money from people enjoying their book or work of art. So, applying the free software principles to visual art or books... we get something like the CC licenses. This same principle applies to the Ubuntu name and logo.
    Richard Stallman makes a similar argument in his essay "Copyright vs Community". It's worth a read.
    Proud GNU/Linux zealot and lover of penguins
    "Value your freedom or you will lose it, teaches history." --Richard Stallman

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Abuja,Nigeria
    Beans
    499
    Distro
    Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron

    Re: Hypocricy in free software

    Quote Originally Posted by NoaHall View Post
    No, because Open Source user != Stallman's follower
    We can believe in Open source, and copyright, side by side.
    We might believe programs should be openly developed, doesn't mean we believe songs, logos, etc should be free or free to distribute.
    Why do you have to bring RMS into this, FYI the FSF and even RMS have said it many times that Free software or GPL can not be applied to artist work. or trade marks, Their stand is on software, and source codes not artwork which is completely different. Ubuntu logo is an artwork which happen to be a trade mark of canonical. The source code of ubuntu is free, the artwork and trade mark are not.
    servant of the secret fire, wielder of the flame of Anor!

    Blog identica twitter lastfm

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •