ubuntu logo stolen again?

[SonnHalter]

i was poking around on stock exchange and came across this (http://www.stockxpert.com/browse_image/view/42939011/?ref=sxc_hu)

http://images.stockxpert.com/pic/m/j/ju/juliengron/42939011_53748473.jpg


anyone else think it's a complete rip off?

[JordyD]

There is some definite tearing going on here. Either Ubuntu ripped-off them or they ripped-off Ubuntu.

Is there a date on it?

[SonnHalter]

» Upload date
Jun 23, 2009

[Mehall]

the artwork is called "Abstract humans together"

Humans together is EXACTLY what the Ubuntu logo is. Clear TM violation there.

[The Toxic Mite]

the artwork is called "Abstract humans together"

Humans together is EXACTLY what the Ubuntu logo is. Clear TM violation there.

Yep. :|

[DeadSuperHero]

Oh come on, do you guys have nothing better to do than deliberately try and find photos that look almost exactly like the Ubuntu logo, just so you can complain about the similarities and bug those poor people into changing it for your own interests?

Let it go for once. It's not your God, it's a logo.

[SonnHalter]

Oh come on, do you guys have nothing better to do than go around on a stock image site and accidently photos that look almost exactly like the Ubuntu logo, just so you can regulate trademarks and copyright systems that make the world go around and talk about the similarities and ask these thieves who are making money off work that isn't theirs what the hell is going on?

Let's go! It's a rip-off, it's the law.


Apparently you have never had any work of yours stolen. you'd know how it feels.

[lisati]

Anyone brought this to Cannonical's attention yet? If the rip-off is real (and I can see how someone might think this) they might want to know about it.

[dragos240]

Canonical really should know.

EDIT: I just contacted canonical about the violation. Should be dealt with shortly.

[damis648]

There is a comments section to that. Post your disapproval. I have.

[DeadSuperHero]

It barely even looks like the logo. Gosh, it shows people hugging and talks about humans? Only about 100 other logos show that.

Your ridiculous protection of this name brand is, quite frankly, bizarre. Most users are hypocritical in the fact that they have no problem re-creating proprietary themes and icon sets. Implement a patented design from a large corporation? Gosh, if the implementation is free it must be alright.

But NOOO, heaven forbid someone make a logo slightly similar to the Ubuntu logo. Heaven forbid someone use the Ubuntu name for something. Protect the "Intellectual Property" if it isn't Micro$oft (a dollar sign for the road for all you BN contributers out there)

You kids have too much time on your hands.

[LookTJ]

Anyone brought this to Cannonical's attention yet? If the rip-off is real (and I can see how someone might think this) they might want to know about it.
I've sent a receipt to Canonical :)

[swoll1980]

It barely even looks like the logo. Gosh, it shows people hugging and talks about humans? Only about 100 other logos show that.


Do you have nothing better to do than what your doing? What if they are kids? Then that would mean your harassing kids, for sticking up for something that they believe in. Shame on you.

[DeadSuperHero]

Because harassing corporations due to "Intellectual Property" and giving kids conflicting values is a lifelong goal to uphold?

Shame on YOU.

[swoll1980]

Because harassing corporations due to "Intellectual Property" and giving kids conflicting values is a lifelong goal to uphold?

Shame on YOU.

I could care less if someone uses Ubuntu's logo, but if that's what floats their boat...

[gn2]

The concept of a circle of friends as an icon or badge wasn't something that was started by Ubuntu or Canonical, so there's no need to start throwing the toys out the pram.

[Yownanymous]

It barely even looks like the logo. Gosh, it shows people hugging and talks about humans? Only about 100 other logos show that.

Your ridiculous protection of this name brand is, quite frankly, bizarre. Most users are hypocritical in the fact that they have no problem re-creating proprietary themes and icon sets. Implement a patented design from a large corporation? Gosh, if the implementation is free it must be alright.

But NOOO, heaven forbid someone make a logo slightly similar to the Ubuntu logo. Heaven forbid someone use the Ubuntu name for something. Protect the "Intellectual Property" if it isn't Micro$oft (a dollar sign for the road for all you BN contributers out there)

You kids have too much time on your hands.

And yet it's OK for developers of things like aMSN to swipe the MSN icons and make them obscure? I agree with you here Mr Psycopath, Canonical is becoming a bit of an evil empire.

[DownTown22]

Because harassing corporations due to "Intellectual Property" and giving kids conflicting values is a lifelong goal to uphold?

Shame on YOU.

You just love trolling this site to start a flame fest eh? Then head over to Linsux and complain about it there...

[swoll1980]

You just love trolling this site to start a flame fest eh? Then head over to Linsux and complain about it there...

If I would have known he was a troller I wouldn't have wasted my time.

[Yownanymous]

You just love trolling this site to start a flame fest eh? Then head over to Linsux and complain about it there...

So having a different opinion to the rest of you *cough* sheep is automatically being a troll?

Great.

[swoll1980]

So having a different opinion to the rest of you *cough* sheep is automatically being a troll?

Great.

Is Scotland as gorgeous as it is in the movies, and photographs?

[Yownanymous]

Is Scotland as gorgeous as it is in the movies, and photographs?

Depends where you go.

[mobilediesel]

It barely even looks like the logo. Gosh, it shows people hugging and talks about humans? Only about 100 other logos show that.

Exactly. That logo is *just* different enough that copyright law wouldn't even look twice.

Annoying? Maybe.
Big deal? Not even a little deal.

[gn2]

Is Scotland as gorgeous as it is in the movies, and photographs?

Yes and no.

[swoll1980]

Depends where you go.

I have to visit there before I die. I've wanted to visit there since I was a small child, perhaps even live there once I finish college.

[monsterstack]

Who tagged this thread "copyvio"? It's a trademark issue. I don't really mind about trademark law. It serves a useful purpose, after all. But still I'm sorry, chaps, there is no way in hell that Stock Xpert could ever be confused with Ubuntu, or even being remotely connected in some way. Not a chance. And that's what trademark law is supposed to stop, you know. It isn't about shutting down anyone who has a logo that's vaguely similar to your own.

[Yownanymous]

I have to visit there before I die. I've wanted to visit there since I was a small child, perhaps even live there once I finish college.

Tip: Don't spend too long in any one place. Some of the locals are particularly evil.

[SonnHalter]

Well therefore so are the aMSN/Emesene icons.


permission permission permission...

[swoll1980]

Tip: Don't spend too long in any one place. Some of the locals are particularly evil.

Thanks for the advice. ;)

[Simian Man]

Mr. Psychpath is exactly right, you guys seriously need to get a life.

Besides this happens all the time. (http://www.logodesignlove.com/similar-original-logos)

[The Toxic Mite]

...

This is a copyvio, and we know it.

[SonnHalter]

Mr. Psychpath is exactly right, you guys seriously need to get a life.

Besides this happens all the time. (http://www.logodesignlove.com/similar-original-logos)

businesses, not users.

Displaying a logo and Distributing it are completely different.

For everyone saying it's fine


Permission from us is necessary to use any of the Trademarks under any circumstances other than those specifically permitted above. These include:

*

Any commercial use.
*

Use on or in relation to a software product that includes or is built on top of a product supplied by us, if there is any commercial intent associated with that product.
*

Use in a domain name or URL.
*

Use for merchandising purposes, e.g. on t-shirts and the like.
*

Use of a name which includes the letters BUNTU in relation to computer hardware or software.
*

Services relating to any of the above.



the user in question is selling 'his' art online for money in the site's form of "credits"

[benerivo]

What happened about the older story about the Microsoft Alumni logo? I recall that the Microsoft logo pre-dates Ubuntu, but I may be wrong.
https://www.msanet.org/images/msa_logo.gif

[monsterstack]

...

This is a copyvio, and we know it.

No. Fail. Wrong. Go to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Error. Wrong. Error.

Copyrights != trademarks.

I explained this like ten minutes ago. Read the thread, man.

[Simian Man]

businesses, not users.

Displaying a logo and Distributing it are completely different.

For everyone saying it's fine

the user in question is selling 'his' art online for money in the site's form of "credits"

That would be true if he is using the Ubuntu logo. But he *isn't*. He's using a logo that looks vaguely like the Ubuntu logo (and dozens of other logos too). That isn't illegal or unethical in any way.

[CJ Master]

Mr. Psychpath is exactly right, you guys seriously need to get a life.

Besides this happens all the time. (http://www.logodesignlove.com/similar-original-logos)

OMG! The humans right movement has to be BURNED!!

[SonnHalter]

That would be true if he is using the Ubuntu logo. But he *isn't*. He's using a logo that looks vaguely like the Ubuntu logo (and dozens of other logos too). That isn't illegal or unethical in any way.

vaguely?
it's not like the title and the ubuntu artwork description match or anything.

If you're right, then I'm introducing my next artwork.

http://i25.tinypic.com/ipsbd1.jpg

for 10$ you can use this logo for display


By your standards, I'm fine! I can sell this and do whatever I want with it right. I mean, it is my artwork.

[djmh]

well the way i see it is, if its promoting humans helping humans ...then them taking the logo is the whole ubuntu philosophy of sharing and helping each other out right ?
i mean thats what ubuntu is all about, isnt it ?
to go and shutdown some ones elses logo is completly against the ubuntu theory, which really saddens me that you dont realize this... in fact if that is what we are doing lets just shut most of ubuntus apps down - now this may be a wrong comparison...i dont know which came first, but open office, isnt that a copy of microsoft word ? oh sure, it has some differences... but so does the logo...so lets shut it down !!!
right ??
cmon, that would destroy many many great apps im sure ....
and it is just the antithesis of the meaning of ubuntu ....

[djmh]

SonnHalter, how much is shipping? - that is a very nice design !
i would like to alter that slightly, and sell it for $20 :)

[SonnHalter]

well the way i see it is, if its promoting humans helping humans ...then them taking the logo is the whole ubuntu philosophy of sharing and helping each other out right ?
i mean thats what ubuntu is all about, isnt it ?
to go and shutdown some ones elses logo is completly against the ubuntu theory, which really saddens me that you dont realize this... in fact if that is what we are doing lets just shut most of ubuntus apps down - now this may be a wrong comparison...i dont know which came first, but open office, isnt that a copy of microsoft word ? oh sure, it has some differences... but so does the logo...so lets shut it down !!!
right ??
cmon, that would destroy many many great apps im sure ....
and it is just the antithesis of the meaning of ubuntu ....

it's not about the displaying, it's the distribution.

helping human rights, helps humans, they don't sell their logo.

[SonnHalter]

SonnHalter, how much is shipping? - that is a very nice design !
i would like to alter that slightly, and sell it for $20 :)

I'm not sure. better ask Simian Man, he's the legal expert here.

[djmh]

what do you mean the distribution ? - maybe i am confused with what the problem is here ...

the way i am seeing it is a company took the ubuntu logo, and altered it to fit their needs ... the same as rolling your own distro, but your distro is based largely on ubuntu. then you distribute it to people who have the same taste as you.
which is the whole philosophy of open source, linux, and ubuntu... correct ?

[SonnHalter]

the person who stole the logo is selling the logo. he is not a business his sole purpose is distrubuting that logo. look at first post

[Mr. Picklesworth]

And yet it's OK for developers of things like aMSN to swipe the MSN icons and make them obscure? I agree with you here Mr Psycopath, Canonical is becoming a bit of an evil empire.

I agree with Mr Psycopath, too, but it isn't about Canonical. The people over-reacting are acting like loudmouths with a desire for Canonical to become an evil empire. If they just kept it quiet and emailed the necessary parties, once, without dispatching a pitchfork-brandishing hoard from this forum (AGAIN), I am sure it would be better for everyone.

Further, nothing would happen because nobody is violating any copyrights, trademarks or whatevers here. It's a circle with dots on it.

This thread serves no purpose beyond attracting an unjust hoard to trample on an artist's work, simply because the original poster doesn't like it. There is no actual fact to suggest that anyone is doing anything wrong. Therefore, this thread should be jailed immediately.

Further, I propose that there be a forum rule to state that complaints of a legal nature should not be posted here, but instead sent directly to the relevant copyright holders or authorities. This should especially be the case when the poster has no actual stakes in the matter. However, it should apply everywhere since threads like this exist solely to use the forum community as a weapon. That is, as far as I am aware, not good for anyone.
After all, harrasment is considered a bad thing. In this example, if a large crowd from a community starts harassing someone on behalf of a certain company, that company is going to have a big mess to clean up (courtesy of its community). If it were to actually press charges some day, the defendant would have a mighty counter-claim.

Edit: Moved this grumpy thought to its own thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1213567).

[SonnHalter]

READ THIS POST
Okay people

The problem is that the person here is selling the logo, he is not displaying it like aMSN uses a similar logo from msn to identify their program

There is no copyright violation, it's a trademark issue.

[DeadSuperHero]

words.

It barely looks like the Ubuntu logo as it is. As Mr. Picklesworth stated, it's basically just a circle with dots in it.

This kind of community badgering is a nuisance. It's been growing progressively worse in this community over the past few years.

And finally, whose business is it really to decide whether someone owns the rights to a logo of a circle with dots in it or not?

Orwellian much?

[SonnHalter]

so in your world, let's you say write a novel, I take your novel change a sentence and resell it. that would be fine to you?

[djmh]

i understand now...
the logo should not be sold for profit, you are right.
canonical is not becoming an evil empire if they stop someone fro selling their logo.
on the other hand though if they were stopping people from using their logo, then they would just be going against the philosophy of linux...and becoming an evil empire i suppose...

[djmh]

uhhm, turns out novels aren't open source.

[DeadSuperHero]

so in your world, let's you say write a novel, I take your novel change a sentence and resell it. that would be fine to you?

Yes, because I license all of my works (http://www.lastguyonearth.lostsignalweb.com/writing/) under the Creative Commons.

[Giant Speck]

The only similarity I see is three people in a circle holding hands.

Does Canonical hold a trademark for the concept of three people in a circle holding hands? Because I thought all they had a trademark for was this:

http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:Esx5KczIm509sM:http://www.linuxscrew.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/ubuntu_logo.gif

[Mr. Picklesworth]

so in your world, let's you say write a novel, I take your novel change a sentence and resell it. that would be fine to you?

As a matter of fact, that is precisely the kind of thing Copyleft licenses (http://creativecommons.org/) allow. Considering that, if I wrote a novel, it would be under CC BY-SA... yes, I would be fine with that.

I don't see how this has anything to do with someone making a logo with a circle cut into differently shaded thirds and some equally spaced dots.
If someone made a novel that was similar to mine in topic and style, I would still be okay with it, since it doesn't compromise my own. I may contact the author and ask if they had some inspiration from me, in which case I would pappreciate some kind of attribution.

Oh, and I guess I should throw in another analogy: If someone had a logo that looked like mine, I would quietly and personally contact them. I would ask, gently, how we could work together to avoid confusion. After all, that is the fair, free and human thing to do. People involved would all appreciate the aura of sense and decency built on an acceptance that we are all in this together.

[SonnHalter]

Yes, because I license all of my works (http://www.lastguyonearth.lostsignalweb.com/writing/) under the Creative Commons.

all creative commons license require attribution to the author.


The only similarity I see is three people in a circle holding hands.

Does Canonical hold a trademark for the concept of three people in a circle holding hands? Because I thought all they had a trademark for was this
http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy

[DeadSuperHero]

all creative commons license require attribution to the author.

Wrong. All Attribution licenses require it. For someone that claims to understand and know the law, you sure need to brush up on your knowledge of the functions of Copyleft licenses.

[SonnHalter]

Wrong. All Attribution licenses require it. For someone that claims to understand and know the law, you sure need to brush up on your knowledge of the functions of Copyleft licenses.

"With a Creative Commons license, you keep your copyright but allow people to copy and distribute your work provided they give you credithttp://creativecommons.org/license/

and when did i ever say that?

[DeadSuperHero]

"With a Creative Commons license, you keep your copyright but allow people to copy and distribute your work provided they give you credithttp://creativecommons.org/license/

and when did i ever say that?

You're quoting the terms for the attribution license. There's multiple licenses that you've simply lumped together. An ordinary CC license does not require is, a CC-BY is the Attribution in which your work requires a reference. Likewise, BY-SA requires that the license remain unchanged, giving an open possibility to re-license BY and other non-SA licenses.

[Giant Speck]

http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy

Yeah, nothing on that page indicates that Canonical owns the exclusive rights to pictures showing three people in a circle holding friends, and therefore I'm going to say that I don't think an infringement is being made.

[SonnHalter]

You're quoting the terms for the attribution license. There's multiple licenses that you've simply lumped together. An ordinary CC license does not require is, a CC-BY is the Attribution in which your work requires a reference. Likewise, BY-SA requires that the license remain unchanged, giving an open possibility to re-license BY and other non-SA licenses.
ah, my bad.

[subdivision]

Good thing you're all here to jump to Canonical's aid. Otherwise who KNOWS how many circular logos with dots in them would be floating around. It would be anarchy!

[SonnHalter]

Yeah, nothing on that page indicates that Canonical owns the exclusive rights to pictures showing three people in a circle holding friends, and therefore I'm going to say that I don't think an infringement is being made.

good for you, i think Megan Fox is rockin'


Good thing you're all here to jump to Canonical's aid. Otherwise who KNOWS how many circular logos with dots in them would be floating around. It would be anarchy!

long as they aren't sellin' em.

[subdivision]

good for you, i think Megan Fox is rockin'

Oh okay.

[Giant Speck]

good for you, i think Megan Fox is rockin'

Megan Fox is nothing more than a young clone of Angelina Jolie, sans the creepy giant lips.

[subdivision]

good for you, i think Megan Fox is rockin'
long as they aren't sellin' em.

That would just be awful if people could actually sell things that looked vaguely like other things.

[DeadSuperHero]

Yeah, the Chinese Black Market would never be the same. Original products in a Black Market? Forshame!

[SonnHalter]

nice debate guys, i'm off to bed.

[CJ Master]

I notice how half of linsux seems to be here...

It's a trap!

[DeadSuperHero]

Relax, it's on your own site's turf. We haven't broken any horrifically violating rules.

[Giant Speck]

I notice how half of linsux seems to be here...

It's a trap!

Yes, because Linsux is serious business. :roll:

[DeadSuperHero]

Quick! Someone get Roy Schestowitz on the line! I hear me an article title cooking up!

"M$ $hill$ from Anti-GNU/Linux Community Threatens the Mono-Supporting Ubuntu Forums? Madness? Your Guess is as Good as Mine."

[Giant Speck]

Quick! Someone get Roy Schestowitz on the line! I hear me an article title cooking up!

"M$ $hill$ from Anti-GNU/Linux Community Threatens the Mono-Supporting Ubuntu Forums? Madness? Your Guess is as Good as Mine."

Um... speak for yourself. I'm a person, not an extension of a forum.

[cariboo]

This thread seems to have veered way off topic. THis thread is closed.