Skins

[JCDes]

Lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[dlanor]

It shouldnt be any type of legal issue as he isnt infringing upon the trademarks, but only displaying an image of a Sony product, which is perfectly legal.

The image of Sony Memory Card is not a trademark. The trademarks are on the MC, but thats where they are supposed to be.

Good point.

I suppose this is one of those cases where an exact copy is more legal than an edited one, because if the picture of such a product is otherwise modified (thus no longer an illustration of the real product) the logos immediately become illegal to have in those pictures.

Still, as long as they are legal in the current form, I have no objection.

Nothing illegal there buddy... And I do not see you complaining about the ones already in that thread when they show controllers and consoles.... Justice for all my friend not just to some...

And I've been thinking about those other skins too, in regard to legality. I just haven't come around to bringing it up in any posts yet.

In my case like JNABK said I'm using pictures of products not logos or any copyrighted material... Practically I'm giving them a free ad...

Agreed, but it's a fine line to tread.

If any change is made to the illustration of the product carrying the logo, then it becomes illegal to keep that logo, unless that too is changed somehow. And it is always illegal for us to use a sony trademark or logo in any other context than as part of such a picture.

No doing at all actually piece of cake... I did not put the logo there, sony did...

True. And as long as we only use the logo that way, it should be OK.

Edit:
On second thought, I'm still not really sure if those pictures are strictly legal. In one of them the string "Powered by FreeMcBoot" has been edited into the picture to make it appear to be integral to the memory card. And in the other picture the same thing has been done with the string "uLaunchelf". I agree that this editing is decorative (though I prefer the casing "uLaunchELF"), but that is not the point.

The point is that editing the part of the picture that shows the memory card, so that it no longer shows how real memory cards look, but imaginary ones embossed with our project titles, could be construed as illegally associating the Sony logos with our projects.

If ours had been commercial projects a lawsuit would have been inevitable...

I'll leave the pictures intact, pending further discussion, but I don't consider the case closed.

Btw: It's not that I want to block these or any other skins myself. I like them. But I also like keeping these projects legal, and to me that has a higher priority. If you can convince me that this usage is legal, I will drop my objections. But like I said earlier, convincing me will take some doing...

And once we reach a final conclusion on this issue, the 'verdict' (either way) will be applied to all posted skins. Hopefully they can all stay, as that is what I want too, but only if that really is legal.

Best regards: dlanor

[JCDes]

On second thought, I'm still not really sure if those pictures are strictly legal. In one of them the string "Powered by FreeMcBoot" has been edited into the picture to make it appear to be integral to the memory card.

Nice argument but is missing one fundamental base:

That specific area of the memory card is dedicated so the user can label it to identify the contents... I guess it could even say "Powered by JeT Fuel"...

Also I gave the font a much lighter and brighter color and a bevel in darker shade so it would look as a sticker that was placed there and the proper skew just so it would match the angle the MC picture is at but not completely... If I wanted it to look like part of it I would have given it the exact same color as the PS logo, font and no bevel... It is a matter of visual appreciation... But believe me If I would have wanted it to look like it was born there I would have done it but that was not the intention...

[JoeUser38]

Nice argument but is missing one fundamental base:

That specific area of the memory card is dedicated so the user can label it to identify the contents... I guess it could even say "Powered by JeT Fuel"...

Also I gave the font a much lighter and brighter color and a bevel in darker shade so it would look as a sticker that was placed there and the proper skew just so it would match the angle the MC picture is at but not completely... If I wanted it to look like part of it I would have given it the exact same color as the PS logo, font and no bevel... It is a matter of visual appreciation... But believe me If I would have wanted it to look like it was born there I would have done it but that was not the intention...

That is a VERY good point to me. After all, wouldn't it be legal to include an actual picture of a memory card with a label saying anything you want there? If so, what's the difference in "photoshoping" it in?

[JNABK]

I suppose this is one of those cases where an exact copy is more legal than an edited one, because if the picture of such a product is otherwise modified (thus no longer an illustration of the real product) the logos immediately become illegal to have in those pictures.

It makes no difference if you use an exact copy of the product or you alter it to your own personal taste. You are allowed to modify any product you purchase any way you see fit. {Selling it is a whole different story.}
So to display an image of a product you might wish to buy or did buy, you can display it freely to show others your modifications. {like the modified case covers for the consoles, they are not illegal to sell unless they have a Sony trademark on them and arent sanctioned by Sony to use any trademarks}

If any change is made to the illustration of the product carrying the logo, then it becomes illegal to keep that logo, unless that too is changed somehow. And it is always illegal for us to use a sony trademark or logo in any other context than as part of such a picture.

No that is not the legal issues of trademark infringement, you can edit a trademark, use a trademark or do anything with that trademark as long as it is not for the purpose of selling a product. It would only be free advertisement to the company owning the trademarks.

Edit:
On second thought, I'm still not really sure if those pictures are strictly legal. In one of them the string "Powered by FreeMcBoot" has been edited into the picture to make it appear to be integral to the memory card. And in the other picture the same thing has been done with the string "uLaunchelf".

That indentation on the MC is designed there for users to place a label to mark the MC as different from others they might have, so by putting anything in that area is perfectly legal. You can alter the image of the MC any way you want, and its still not anything illegal. If you want to color the MC purple and add stripes down the middle, right thru the "playstation 2", you can without any legal reprocussions.

The point is that editing the part of the picture that shows the memory card, so that it no longer shows how real memory cards look, but imaginary ones embossed with our project titles, could be construed as illegally associating the Sony logos with our projects.

A trademark is a company 'branding' stamp to identify it in the market place of commerce. The idea is for a company to have such a good reputation that their 'trademark' becomes a common reputation as a good product to buy, so by using a trademark to sell your product, you can cut some costs in advertising. Using a trademark belonging to another company to sell your own product is where trademark infringement laws come into play.

By associating any Sony trademarks into a homebrew project {as long as it remains a free product} would only be viewed as a boost to Sony, perhaps even making a few more sales for them on a console, MC, etc. (im sure they secretly would say its good free advertisement for the console). If the free homebrew project is that good, it only adds to the reputation of the trademark, thus a 'plus' benefit to the company.
As long as your not attempting to take away their marketshare as a competitor using their trademarks, they wont bother about a trademark suit.

If ours had been commercial projects a lawsuit would have been inevitable...

No, first a "cease and desist" order would have been issued by their attorney. They MUST first attempt to ask you to stop using their trademark. Only if it was ignored would a suit be the next course of action for them to persue.

If you can convince me that this usage is legal, I will drop my objections. But like I said earlier, convincing me will take some doing...

Well i hope i have convinced you enough to ease your mind....believe me, we arent doing anything illegal with the trademarks or logos.

And once we reach a final conclusion on this issue, the 'verdict' (either way) will be applied to all posted skins. Hopefully they can all stay, as that is what I want too, but only if that really is legal.

Best regards: dlanor

Really, it is perfectly legal as long as Free McBoot, uLaunchELF or any other homebrew app using any such skins with a 'trademark' image is NOT for sale or placed into the commercial market place, theres nothing to be concerned about.

A trademark is not the same as a copyright. I would be more concerned with the use of copyrighted images used than trademark images. But again, as long as there is not money to be made, many copyright holders of images that may be used in such skins wouldnt even bother, since its not in a context of 'competition' in the purpose they intended their images. Of course their maybe some who dont like to see their 'art' used in any other manner than what they created, so again, a cease and desist order would be the first contact and the image simply removed as the proper way to avoid any further issues with whomever should make such a claim.

[ps2dragon]

I still don't understand how something like this, which is not making any money can be considered illegal? I have been searching around online, but still haven't found any solid proof to suggest how this is illegal or legal. The PS2 font I used in my uLE skin can be re-created using the MINIMALHARD font, or what about the Zrnic font? Both are from www.dafont.com, which is a free font site. If you made your own t-shirt and put your own Nike logo on it, but didn't sell it and just wore it or gave it to your friend, do you think that would also be illegal? Maybe it could be if you were giving them away for free online and that was somehow taking away from their profits?

EDIT: I think what JNABK said makes sense. I don't see why any company would care as long as you're not taking sales away from them in some way. I really don't see how any of this is affecting Sony at all. What grounds would they have to sue? I just don't get it...

[bootsector]

C'mon peeps! This is an "artists thread" or a "lawyers thread"?

Keep the skins coming and let discuss about their legallity when there are no more to come!

[JNABK]

C'mon peeps! This is an "artists thread" or a "lawyers thread"?

lol...seems to have become a bit of both.....actually its just one guy who "made a mistake and wants his skin moved to the correct thread with all the rest thread".

At least do that for him.........keep this thread separate for future discussions of image 'legality' and as a good read for those who follow with similar thoughts.

[dlanor]

I still don't understand how something like this, which is not making any money can be considered illegal?

Because money-making has nothing to do with the rights held by the owner of a trademark, copyright, or patent.

For all those cases the owner has the right to restrict how others use the owned material, regardless of what kind of use we are speaking of, and regardless of whether they make any money out of that activity or not.

I have been searching around online, but still haven't found any solid proof to suggest how this is illegal or legal.

I'm not really certain myself, as I consider this a border-line case.

The PS2 font I used in my uLE skin can be re-created using the MINIMALHARD font, or what about the Zrnic font? Both are from www.dafont.com, which is a free font site.

That is not the point. You can find almost anything on various free sites, including a lot of copyrighted material, so that doesn't prove anything.

The real point is whether or not anyone has copyrighted the material in question or registered it as an official trademark. And that is obviously not the case for the characters of a font, though a font file as such might be copyrighted, though that is not a problem when obtaining it from a site intended for free fonts. Even if one of them should turn out to be copyrighted, getting it under such circumstances would be considered 'acting in good faith'.

For such cases it is the site owner/admins that could get in trouble, though normally this would be limited to forced removal of any copyrighted or trademarked items from the site.

If you made your own t-shirt and put your own Nike logo on it, but didn't sell it and just wore it or gave it to your friend, do you think that would also be illegal?

If being really strict about it, a case could be made against such use. It would never happen in a real court of law, but legally the possibility exists.

Any public use of trademark symbols is reserved for the trademark owner, directly or indirectly. So a t-shirt made by them may be freely worn or redistributed, but an identical t-shirt not coming from them is illegal to display in public or to distribute. Absurd but true...

Maybe it could be if you were giving them away for free online and that was somehow taking away from their profits?

It's not just a matter of profits, like I said above, but of the rights held by the owners to prevent others from using their trademarks.

Normally a court would look for additional causes for complaint, including loss of profits, and possibly name-smearing etc, but formally no such additional causes need to exist.

EDIT: I think what JNABK said makes sense. I don't see why any company would care as long as you're not taking sales away from them in some way.

In most cases they would not care.

I really don't see how any of this is affecting Sony at all. What grounds would they have to sue? I just don't get it...

I never said that they would sue and I don't really think that they will. But it's a well known fact that they hate the homebrew community and our activities, regarding us all as pirates, so they don't entirely lack motive.

Best regards: dlanor

[dlanor]

lol...seems to have become a bit of both.....actually its just one guy who "made a mistake and wants his skin moved to the correct thread with all the rest thread".

At least do that for him.........keep this thread separate for future discussions of image 'legality' and as a good read for those who follow with similar thoughts.

I've been thinking of doing that myself, so now I will. No need to bury the skin pictures in all the legal 'mumbo-jumbo'...

Though I guess this thread will look a bit odd to newcomers, with everyone referring to a picture post that has been moved away...
Edit: On second thought I decided to keep the original post here too, seeing as it is the 'base post' of the thread.

Best regards: dlanor