Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [midatlanticretro] Re: copyright - trademark

Expand Messages
  • Evan
    Why would we want a currently trendy logo for a vintage organization? Jeff s looks nice and 70s/80s and that s why we all like it. The background image and the
    Message 1 of 16 , Nov 10, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Why would we want a currently trendy logo for a vintage organization?  Jeff's looks nice and 70s/80s and that's why we all like it.
       
      The background image and the M image (a front panel) are unidentifiable snippets.  No one can say, "hey that's MY random circuit board image in the background".
       
      For printing purposes, I'm checking out CafePress.com, which does things methodically and (more imporant) cheaply.
       
      Of course, anyone is welcome to submit logo ideas -- no one here is the Chief Logo Officer or anything.


      From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Frank_OBrien
      Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 12:30 PM
      To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [midatlanticretro] Re: copyright - trademark

      Hi all;


      For some reason, I'm having trouble sending messages - Apologies if
      this is repeated....

      Now, I hate to be a *REAL* spoiler on this, but there are additional,
      significant issues with the logo.

      Dan is correct - On a practical level,  there is *NO* way that any
      corporate intellectual property will be given away. Don't even think
      of it. The fact that MARCH is a non-profit is completely irelevant.

      Additionally, there are two other infringement issues - one for
      the "M", and the "H". Unless it was a picture taken by one of the
      group members it is certainly owned by someone else. And even if it
      was, there are copyrights on design of the panel and Apple II (design
      patents also exist, but I doubt if these are covered by patents),
      which could be applied. Remember, a copyright does *not* have to be
      registered in order to be in force. Is this picky? Well, just ask any
      of the folks who are being busted for file-sharing.

      Also, remember that there isn't much of "formal" relationship (in
      terms of a legal contract) between MARCH and Infoage. Right now it's
      been wonderfully casual. What happens though, is that since there is
      nothing saying that MARCH will indemnify Infoage, then everyone can
      get sued - Fred and myself included. Don't belive it? Try again.
      Honestly, it can get pretty ugly.

      The other issue I have is with the basic layout. The current trend in
      logos / logotypes are ones that can be represented in one or (at
      most) two colors, and a single, somewhat abstracted image with
      perhaps the name of the organization. Case in point: Apple. Long ago
      they abandoned the "rainbow" logo for a single color - and it works
      beautifully. Take a look at the giants of industry - IBM, ADM,
      Bristol-Meyers-Squibb, Exxon, Infoage or even the one I work for -
      Colgate-Palmolive - they all use a clean, clear, simple logotype that
      is easily and immediately recognizeable. And, assuming that the logo
      is unique, all the copyright / trademark issues go away.

      The other related issue is a bit more practical. Have anyone ever
      priced or had to set up a job to have a detailed, multicolored logo
      stitched on a polo shirt? The Infoage ones, which were just a single
      color, were almost $30 each, plus the shirt. Or full color business
      cards (by the way, the logo is *FAR* to busy to work in a small
      format like a business card anyway....  )? If you folks are
      struggling to cover the cost of incorporation, you certainly won't be
      able to afford the shirt.

      Anyway, just my USD $0.02.


      All the best,

      Frank



    • Bryan Pope
      ... Oooo!! I vote for the Commodore logo! :-D Cheers, Bryan
      Message 2 of 16 , Nov 10, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        > I'm working on the recent suggestion of replacing the pacman with the
        > Commodore 'chicken head' logo. The vivid Commodore colors seem to
        > stand out quite a bit, so I will probably subdue the colors to match
        > the tone of the overall image while keeping the shape.

        Oooo!! I vote for the Commodore logo! :-D

        Cheers,

        Bryan
      • Evan
        Sorry to dwell on this but -- permission is not required to use pictures of public products. (Logos, yes, but not pictures.) After all, newspapers and
        Message 3 of 16 , Nov 10, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Sorry to dwell on this but -- permission is not required to use pictures of public products.  (Logos, yes, but not pictures.)
           
          After all, newspapers and computer books like Mike Nadeau's "Collectible Microcomputers" have LOTS of pictures of products, for commercial purposes, and they don't need to seek permission each time.  (Although I'm just not speculating; this is from experience.)


          From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Frank_OBrien
          Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 12:30 PM
          To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [midatlanticretro] Re: copyright - trademark

          Hi all;


          For some reason, I'm having trouble sending messages - Apologies if
          this is repeated....

          Now, I hate to be a *REAL* spoiler on this, but there are additional,
          significant issues with the logo.

          Dan is correct - On a practical level,  there is *NO* way that any
          corporate intellectual property will be given away. Don't even think
          of it. The fact that MARCH is a non-profit is completely irelevant.

          Additionally, there are two other infringement issues - one for
          the "M", and the "H". Unless it was a picture taken by one of the
          group members it is certainly owned by someone else. And even if it
          was, there are copyrights on design of the panel and Apple II (design
          patents also exist, but I doubt if these are covered by patents),
          which could be applied. Remember, a copyright does *not* have to be
          registered in order to be in force. Is this picky? Well, just ask any
          of the folks who are being busted for file-sharing.

          Also, remember that there isn't much of "formal" relationship (in
          terms of a legal contract) between MARCH and Infoage. Right now it's
          been wonderfully casual. What happens though, is that since there is
          nothing saying that MARCH will indemnify Infoage, then everyone can
          get sued - Fred and myself included. Don't belive it? Try again.
          Honestly, it can get pretty ugly.

          The other issue I have is with the basic layout. The current trend in
          logos / logotypes are ones that can be represented in one or (at
          most) two colors, and a single, somewhat abstracted image with
          perhaps the name of the organization. Case in point: Apple. Long ago
          they abandoned the "rainbow" logo for a single color - and it works
          beautifully. Take a look at the giants of industry - IBM, ADM,
          Bristol-Meyers-Squibb, Exxon, Infoage or even the one I work for -
          Colgate-Palmolive - they all use a clean, clear, simple logotype that
          is easily and immediately recognizeable. And, assuming that the logo
          is unique, all the copyright / trademark issues go away.

          The other related issue is a bit more practical. Have anyone ever
          priced or had to set up a job to have a detailed, multicolored logo
          stitched on a polo shirt? The Infoage ones, which were just a single
          color, were almost $30 each, plus the shirt. Or full color business
          cards (by the way, the logo is *FAR* to busy to work in a small
          format like a business card anyway....  )? If you folks are
          struggling to cover the cost of incorporation, you certainly won't be
          able to afford the shirt.

          Anyway, just my USD $0.02.


          All the best,

          Frank



        • Evan
          Addendum ... I forgot to mention that Bruce Damer s DigiBarn (digibarn.com), which is the most successful private computer museum in the country, consists
          Message 4 of 16 , Nov 10, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Addendum ... I forgot to mention that Bruce Damer's DigiBarn (digibarn.com), which is the most successful private computer museum in the country, consists entirely of an ACTUAL BARN (complete with pigs and other farmland creatures) and most of his computers sit atop wooden tables with red-and-white checkered tableclothes of the sort you'd see in a pizzeria.
             
            It doesn't take anything too fancy to have a cool display.   :)


            From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Evan
            Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 1:31 PM
            To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [midatlanticretro] Re: copyright - trademark

            Sorry to dwell on this but -- permission is not required to use pictures of public products.  (Logos, yes, but not pictures.)
             
            After all, newspapers and computer books like Mike Nadeau's "Collectible Microcomputers" have LOTS of pictures of products, for commercial purposes, and they don't need to seek permission each time.  (Although I'm just not speculating; this is from experience.)


            From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Frank_OBrien
            Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 12:30 PM
            To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [midatlanticretro] Re: copyright - trademark

            Hi all;


            For some reason, I'm having trouble sending messages - Apologies if
            this is repeated....

            Now, I hate to be a *REAL* spoiler on this, but there are additional,
            significant issues with the logo.

            Dan is correct - On a practical level,  there is *NO* way that any
            corporate intellectual property will be given away. Don't even think
            of it. The fact that MARCH is a non-profit is completely irelevant.

            Additionally, there are two other infringement issues - one for
            the "M", and the "H". Unless it was a picture taken by one of the
            group members it is certainly owned by someone else. And even if it
            was, there are copyrights on design of the panel and Apple II (design
            patents also exist, but I doubt if these are covered by patents),
            which could be applied. Remember, a copyright does *not* have to be
            registered in order to be in force. Is this picky? Well, just ask any
            of the folks who are being busted for file-sharing.

            Also, remember that there isn't much of "formal" relationship (in
            terms of a legal contract) between MARCH and Infoage. Right now it's
            been wonderfully casual. What happens though, is that since there is
            nothing saying that MARCH will indemnify Infoage, then everyone can
            get sued - Fred and myself included. Don't belive it? Try again.
            Honestly, it can get pretty ugly.

            The other issue I have is with the basic layout. The current trend in
            logos / logotypes are ones that can be represented in one or (at
            most) two colors, and a single, somewhat abstracted image with
            perhaps the name of the organization. Case in point: Apple. Long ago
            they abandoned the "rainbow" logo for a single color - and it works
            beautifully. Take a look at the giants of industry - IBM, ADM,
            Bristol-Meyers-Squibb, Exxon, Infoage or even the one I work for -
            Colgate-Palmolive - they all use a clean, clear, simple logotype that
            is easily and immediately recognizeable. And, assuming that the logo
            is unique, all the copyright / trademark issues go away.

            The other related issue is a bit more practical. Have anyone ever
            priced or had to set up a job to have a detailed, multicolored logo
            stitched on a polo shirt? The Infoage ones, which were just a single
            color, were almost $30 each, plus the shirt. Or full color business
            cards (by the way, the logo is *FAR* to busy to work in a small
            format like a business card anyway....  )? If you folks are
            struggling to cover the cost of incorporation, you certainly won't be
            able to afford the shirt.

            Anyway, just my USD $0.02.


            All the best,

            Frank



          • Evan
            LOL, addendum to the addendum... the comments about DigiBarn were supposed to be attached to my own message about InfoAge expectations, not the the message
            Message 5 of 16 , Nov 10, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              LOL, addendum to the addendum... the comments about DigiBarn were supposed to be attached to my own message about InfoAge expectations, not the the message about permissions and stuff.  My bad.


              From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Evan
              Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 1:38 PM
              To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [midatlanticretro] Re: copyright - trademark

              Addendum ... I forgot to mention that Bruce Damer's DigiBarn (digibarn.com), which is the most successful private computer museum in the country, consists entirely of an ACTUAL BARN (complete with pigs and other farmland creatures) and most of his computers sit atop wooden tables with red-and-white checkered tableclothes of the sort you'd see in a pizzeria.
               
              It doesn't take anything too fancy to have a cool display.   :)


              From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Evan
              Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 1:31 PM
              To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [midatlanticretro] Re: copyright - trademark

              Sorry to dwell on this but -- permission is not required to use pictures of public products.  (Logos, yes, but not pictures.)
               
              After all, newspapers and computer books like Mike Nadeau's "Collectible Microcomputers" have LOTS of pictures of products, for commercial purposes, and they don't need to seek permission each time.  (Although I'm just not speculating; this is from experience.)


              From: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com [mailto:midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Frank_OBrien
              Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 12:30 PM
              To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [midatlanticretro] Re: copyright - trademark

              Hi all;


              For some reason, I'm having trouble sending messages - Apologies if
              this is repeated....

              Now, I hate to be a *REAL* spoiler on this, but there are additional,
              significant issues with the logo.

              Dan is correct - On a practical level,  there is *NO* way that any
              corporate intellectual property will be given away. Don't even think
              of it. The fact that MARCH is a non-profit is completely irelevant.

              Additionally, there are two other infringement issues - one for
              the "M", and the "H". Unless it was a picture taken by one of the
              group members it is certainly owned by someone else. And even if it
              was, there are copyrights on design of the panel and Apple II (design
              patents also exist, but I doubt if these are covered by patents),
              which could be applied. Remember, a copyright does *not* have to be
              registered in order to be in force. Is this picky? Well, just ask any
              of the folks who are being busted for file-sharing.

              Also, remember that there isn't much of "formal" relationship (in
              terms of a legal contract) between MARCH and Infoage. Right now it's
              been wonderfully casual. What happens though, is that since there is
              nothing saying that MARCH will indemnify Infoage, then everyone can
              get sued - Fred and myself included. Don't belive it? Try again.
              Honestly, it can get pretty ugly.

              The other issue I have is with the basic layout. The current trend in
              logos / logotypes are ones that can be represented in one or (at
              most) two colors, and a single, somewhat abstracted image with
              perhaps the name of the organization. Case in point: Apple. Long ago
              they abandoned the "rainbow" logo for a single color - and it works
              beautifully. Take a look at the giants of industry - IBM, ADM,
              Bristol-Meyers-Squibb, Exxon, Infoage or even the one I work for -
              Colgate-Palmolive - they all use a clean, clear, simple logotype that
              is easily and immediately recognizeable. And, assuming that the logo
              is unique, all the copyright / trademark issues go away.

              The other related issue is a bit more practical. Have anyone ever
              priced or had to set up a job to have a detailed, multicolored logo
              stitched on a polo shirt? The Infoage ones, which were just a single
              color, were almost $30 each, plus the shirt. Or full color business
              cards (by the way, the logo is *FAR* to busy to work in a small
              format like a business card anyway....  )? If you folks are
              struggling to cover the cost of incorporation, you certainly won't be
              able to afford the shirt.

              Anyway, just my USD $0.02.


              All the best,

              Frank



            • relayer
              ... Somewhat irrelevant. Stitching is not the only way to get a nice logo on a shirt. And the logo doesn t need to always be in the alligator position. Even
              Message 6 of 16 , Nov 10, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, Frank_OBrien <no_reply@y...>
                wrote:
                > The other related issue is a bit more practical. Have anyone ever
                > priced or had to set up a job to have a detailed, multicolored logo
                > stitched on a polo shirt? The Infoage ones, which were just a single

                Somewhat irrelevant. Stitching is not the only way to get a nice logo
                on a shirt. And the logo doesn't need to always be in the "alligator"
                position. Even on a polo shirt, the logo scales down fairly well.

                CafePress was the suggested source for shirts. Their process is
                similar to the iron-on printer transfers used since the 90's. However,
                the technology has improved greatly since then, where image detail and
                color saturation can be preserved. You can also get buttons,
                mousepads, mugs, hats, etc. Try to stitch a logo on a mug.

                Almost all of the items at CafePress are less than $30 with the logo.
                And to pre-emptively answer the durability question, my wife bought a
                cloth apron from CafePress three years ago with her soapmaking logo on
                it. It still looks good after three years of wear and washings.

                > color, were almost $30 each, plus the shirt. Or full color business
                > cards (by the way, the logo is *FAR* to busy to work in a small
                > format like a business card anyway.... )? If you folks are

                I disagree. I printed the logo on a 600dpi color laser printer which
                is inferior to the card printing systems used at Kinko's, Office Max,
                etc. I was able to scale the image down to 1.5 x 0.6 inches and I
                could still make out the text and graphics. I expect the business card
                printing services at the office supply print shops to be at least
                1200dpi. More than enough resolution to maintain detail. Prices on
                full color business cards are also much closer to that of single color
                cards than they were years ago.

                I'm not trying to aggressively defend the logo as-is because I helped
                to develop it. I'm simply arguing the point that even though the
                computer collections we have may be old, the technology to use for
                promoting the group and logo doesn't need to be. There are newer,
                cheaper, and better methods.
              • Sridhar Ayengar
                ... I ll probably be bringing my own CafePress store up soon. Just putting the final touches on the graphics. I wouldn t mind donating half the proceeds to
                Message 7 of 16 , Nov 10, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  relayer wrote:
                  > --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, Frank_OBrien <no_reply@y...>
                  > wrote:
                  >
                  >>The other related issue is a bit more practical. Have anyone ever
                  >>priced or had to set up a job to have a detailed, multicolored logo
                  >>stitched on a polo shirt? The Infoage ones, which were just a single
                  >
                  >
                  > Somewhat irrelevant. Stitching is not the only way to get a nice logo
                  > on a shirt. And the logo doesn't need to always be in the "alligator"
                  > position. Even on a polo shirt, the logo scales down fairly well.
                  >
                  > CafePress was the suggested source for shirts. Their process is
                  > similar to the iron-on printer transfers used since the 90's. However,
                  > the technology has improved greatly since then, where image detail and
                  > color saturation can be preserved. You can also get buttons,
                  > mousepads, mugs, hats, etc. Try to stitch a logo on a mug.
                  >
                  > Almost all of the items at CafePress are less than $30 with the logo.
                  > And to pre-emptively answer the durability question, my wife bought a
                  > cloth apron from CafePress three years ago with her soapmaking logo on
                  > it. It still looks good after three years of wear and washings.
                  >
                  >
                  >>color, were almost $30 each, plus the shirt. Or full color business
                  >>cards (by the way, the logo is *FAR* to busy to work in a small
                  >>format like a business card anyway.... )? If you folks are
                  >
                  >
                  > I disagree. I printed the logo on a 600dpi color laser printer which
                  > is inferior to the card printing systems used at Kinko's, Office Max,
                  > etc. I was able to scale the image down to 1.5 x 0.6 inches and I
                  > could still make out the text and graphics. I expect the business card
                  > printing services at the office supply print shops to be at least
                  > 1200dpi. More than enough resolution to maintain detail. Prices on
                  > full color business cards are also much closer to that of single color
                  > cards than they were years ago.
                  >
                  > I'm not trying to aggressively defend the logo as-is because I helped
                  > to develop it. I'm simply arguing the point that even though the
                  > computer collections we have may be old, the technology to use for
                  > promoting the group and logo doesn't need to be. There are newer,
                  > cheaper, and better methods.

                  I'll probably be bringing my own CafePress store up soon. Just putting
                  the final touches on the graphics. I wouldn't mind donating half the
                  proceeds to the club. Would the club be interested?

                  Peace... Sridhar
                • Evan
                  What kind of stuff do you plan to sell? ... the final touches on the graphics. I wouldn t mind donating half the proceeds to the club. Would the club be
                  Message 8 of 16 , Nov 10, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    What kind of stuff do you plan to sell?
                     
                    >>>> I'll probably be bringing my own CafePress store up soon.  Just putting the final touches on the graphics.  I wouldn't mind donating half the proceeds to the club.  Would the club be interested?

                    Peace...  Sridhar

                     
                     
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.