Re: one more comment on logos

[denise tanka <denise.tanka@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Let's no confuse trademarks w/ copyrighted material.  (That 'TM' after  
the Google logo signals a unregistered trademark-- quite a different  
matter than copyright.)

*My* $.02

--D

On Jan 28, 2009, at 6:59 PM, Kathrine Henderson wrote:

> Not a lawyer--so this is not a legal opinion, but I do not believe  
> 107 and 110
> exceptions are applicable to the use of trademarks like logos even  
> if the
> nature of the use in non-commercial and educational. I'm not sure who
> mentioned the Latham Act, but I agree it is what is applicable  
> here.  Although
> attributing is always a good idea from a plagiarism perspective, I'm  
> not sure
> that it would make any difference if one was accused of infringing  
> on the
> mark.
>
> Although chances are slim to none that a student or professor would be
> called on the carpet for this kind of use, my view is we still have  
> to make a
> good faith effort to follow whatever intellectual property laws are
> applicable.  There's a lot to be considered when we use slogans,  
> logos, and
> other marks and images-- from use of recognized fonts--google's is  
> copyrighted
> by the designer of the font, and one can purchase it in a digital  
> format for
> $100...to use of that famous Nike swoosh or Indiana Jones' face-- 
> could be
> Disney's could be Harrison Ford's rights we are stepping on.
>
> My $.02,
>
> Kat