You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com> on 2013/12/18 13:34:19 UTC
Flex Showcase legal aspects
Hi,
A few app submissions (eg. "6play" https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French TV channel).
Maurice
Maurice Amsellem
SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 12/18/13 12:22 PM, "Erick Ghaumez" <er...@rxlabz.com> wrote:
>As I¹ve said, the owner is « big » TV group, my contract is with a
>subsidiary company in charge of digital projects. I don¹t know if the one
>who signs my contract is legally authorized to give this permission. But
>if I understand, if he gives one, it becomes his responsibility ?
I am not a lawyer, and could be completely wrong. I'm still waiting on a
response from legal. I don't think it would be fair to get authorization
from someone who you believe is also naïve about these topics, so when you
do ask your contact, I would suggest mentioning that this is to get
official/legal/binding permission. If that person then claims to have the
authority, then unless you know for sure that's wrong, I don't think you
have to try to disprove it.
Business tend to want to control who uses their name and other valuable
assets and how they are associated with others. Individuals do too. Just
because I can take a picture of you sitting outside your favorite café
doesn't mean the café owner can then promote the fact that you love that
café without at least letting you know first.
-ALex
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 12/18/13 2:47 PM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
wrote:
>Wow. I hate blurred images, especially when it's for legal reasons, and I
>think I will not do justice to the really nice app you made.
>But that's only a personal view.
>I really don't know what needs to be done.
>Maybe you should ask the person you know at M6 (CTO ?) like what was
>suggested.
Asking the owners for permission may actually result in permission to use
the images without blurring. It might take time for their legal counsel
to sort it all out, but it is possible. Remember, it theoretically
benefits the TV broadcaster and the TV show's producers to have favorable
viewing of their assets. They or you may have to ask the show's producer.
Or they may have a blanket agreement. The TV broadcaster probably
already has permission to promote the fact that they broadcast show X.
-Alex
>
>Maurice
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
>Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 23:35
>À : dev@flex.apache.org
>Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>
>Maybe i can blur all the logos and pictures in screenshots, and maybe the
>title can only talk about a « anonymous » French Social TV application ?
>
>Erick
>
>Le 18 déc. 2013 à 23:23, Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com> a
>écrit :
>
>> Same in France : rights goes to the employer, IP depends, and you have
>>the rights to use "small quotations" (I guess that's what you call "fair
>>use provision") without permission.
>> There is another issue here:
>> If you look at the screenshots, there don't only show tv channels
>>logos (which belong to the tv channel "group" ) but also pics from TV
>>shows &series (Little House, France Got Talent, etc.) which rights
>>belongs to other companies, that I think M6 has bought the rights to
>>broadcast.
>>
>> Maurice
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : Justin Mclean [mailto:justin@classsoftware.com] Envoyé : mercredi
>> 18 décembre 2013 23:14 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Flex
>> Showcase legal aspects
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Under US law there is also a fair use provision, which the showcase
>>would probably come under (and permission is not required), but it IMO
>>always best to ask.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Justin
>
>
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com>.
Wow. I hate blurred images, especially when it's for legal reasons, and I think I will not do justice to the really nice app you made.
But that's only a personal view.
I really don't know what needs to be done.
Maybe you should ask the person you know at M6 (CTO ?) like what was suggested.
Maurice
-----Message d'origine-----
De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 23:35
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Maybe i can blur all the logos and pictures in screenshots, and maybe the title can only talk about a « anonymous » French Social TV application ?
Erick
Le 18 déc. 2013 à 23:23, Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com> a écrit :
> Same in France : rights goes to the employer, IP depends, and you have the rights to use "small quotations" (I guess that's what you call "fair use provision") without permission.
> There is another issue here:
> If you look at the screenshots, there don't only show tv channels logos (which belong to the tv channel "group" ) but also pics from TV shows &series (Little House, France Got Talent, etc.) which rights belongs to other companies, that I think M6 has bought the rights to broadcast.
>
> Maurice
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Justin Mclean [mailto:justin@classsoftware.com] Envoyé : mercredi
> 18 décembre 2013 23:14 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Flex
> Showcase legal aspects
>
> Hi,
>
> Under US law there is also a fair use provision, which the showcase would probably come under (and permission is not required), but it IMO always best to ask.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Erick Ghaumez <er...@rxlabz.com>.
Maybe i can blur all the logos and pictures in screenshots, and maybe the title can only talk about a « anonymous » French Social TV application ?
Erick
Le 18 déc. 2013 à 23:23, Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com> a écrit :
> Same in France : rights goes to the employer, IP depends, and you have the rights to use "small quotations" (I guess that's what you call "fair use provision") without permission.
> There is another issue here:
> If you look at the screenshots, there don't only show tv channels logos (which belong to the tv channel "group" ) but also pics from TV shows &series (Little House, France Got Talent, etc.) which rights belongs to other companies, that I think M6 has bought the rights to broadcast.
>
> Maurice
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Justin Mclean [mailto:justin@classsoftware.com]
> Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 23:14
> À : dev@flex.apache.org
> Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>
> Hi,
>
> Under US law there is also a fair use provision, which the showcase would probably come under (and permission is not required), but it IMO always best to ask.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com>.
Same in France : rights goes to the employer, IP depends, and you have the rights to use "small quotations" (I guess that's what you call "fair use provision") without permission.
There is another issue here:
If you look at the screenshots, there don't only show tv channels logos (which belong to the tv channel "group" ) but also pics from TV shows &series (Little House, France Got Talent, etc.) which rights belongs to other companies, that I think M6 has bought the rights to broadcast.
Maurice
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Justin Mclean [mailto:justin@classsoftware.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 23:14
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Hi,
Under US law there is also a fair use provision, which the showcase would probably come under (and permission is not required), but it IMO always best to ask.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Jeffry Houser <je...@dot-com-it.com>.
To counter your point about commercial use never being fair use:; I'll
quote TechDirt (
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131125/10182325360/beastie-boys-say-they-dont-want-music-ads-fair-use-doesnt-care.shtml
) quoting a Supreme Court ruling (
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/510/569/case.html )
[StartQuote]
...the Supreme Court explicitly stated in /Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music,
Inc./ that commercial use can be fair use
<http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/510/569/case.html>, noting
that if commercial use made things automatic infringement, it would
destroy fair use:
/If, indeed, commerciality carried presumptive force against a finding
of fairness, the presumption would swallow nearly all of the
illustrative uses listed in the preamble paragraph of § 107, including
news reporting, comment, criticism, teaching, scholarship, and research,
since these activities "are generally conducted for profit in this
country." Harper & Row, supra, at 592 (Brennan, J., dissenting).
Congress could not have intended such a rule, which certainly is not
inferable from the common-law cases... /
[EndQuote]
The usual caveats apply: I am not a lawyer and being legally right
will not prevent you from getting sued into oblivion by a more powerful
party.
On 12/18/2013 9:42 PM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski wrote:
> Fair Use is pretty limited in the USA, and is usually regarded in terms of
> education or personal use. Advertisement is generally not allowed under
> fair-use.... but again, that is something for the legal-beagles to
> determine ;)
>
> -Nick
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Under US law there is also a fair use provision, which the showcase would
>> probably come under (and permission is not required), but it IMO always
>> best to ask.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Justin
--
Jeffry Houser
Technical Entrepreneur
http://www.jeffryhouser.com
203-379-0773
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Nicholas Kwiatkowski <ni...@spoon.as>.
Fair Use is pretty limited in the USA, and is usually regarded in terms of
education or personal use. Advertisement is generally not allowed under
fair-use.... but again, that is something for the legal-beagles to
determine ;)
-Nick
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Under US law there is also a fair use provision, which the showcase would
> probably come under (and permission is not required), but it IMO always
> best to ask.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
Under US law there is also a fair use provision, which the showcase would probably come under (and permission is not required), but it IMO always best to ask.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Nicholas Kwiatkowski <ni...@spoon.as>.
Within the USA, if you do work-for-hire, the IP rights and everything
associated with it generally go to employer. That is, unless you expressly
reserve those rights.
Every country is different. Some of my customers are happy to have me tell
their story -- others don't want people to know who worked on it in the
background (or what technology is used). Always best to check.
-Nick
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Erick Ghaumez <er...@rxlabz.com> wrote:
> Le 18 déc. 2013 à 17:45, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> a écrit :
>
> >
> >
> > On 12/18/13 7:00 AM, "Erick Ghaumez" <er...@rxlabz.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I obviously understand these legal doubts, but IMHO for the use of this
> 3
> >> screenshots, it will be endless.
> >> What kind of permission can be legal ? Is there a template document
> >> somewhere ?
> >> I can ask to the M6Web's CTO ( M6Web is the subsidiary company which is
> >> in charge of digital projects ), but will it be legally good enough ?
> >> Does Apache need a CEO or lawyer/notary validated document ?
> >> Plus, since M6 is a french Group, it will depends on french laws...
> >> I will tell them that I added 6play in the Apache Flex showcase list, if
> >> it¹s a problem for them I¹ll warn you. Does this sounds ok for you ?
> > Yes, contact whoever actually owns this work and notify them that you
> > would like to put their site on our showcase, and that you'll need to
> > copy/paste their permission into a public JIRA issue. Then it is their
> > responsibility to make sure the right person authorizes it. At Apache,
> we
> > have a VP Branding who would do that. I don't know how big the owning
> > company is, but they should know who can sign for them. Someone had to
> > authorize the contract that is paying you, so they know how signing
> > authority works.
>
> :) sure, they probably know how signing authority works, but i don’t.
> Sorry, i was maybe kind of naive to think I can just take some screenshots
> of my work and use it to try to promote the SDK I’d used to make it.
> Indeed, it’s my work, but not my property.
> As I’ve said, the owner is « big » TV group, my contract is with a
> subsidiary company in charge of digital projects. I don’t know if the one
> who signs my contract is legally authorized to give this permission. But if
> I understand, if he gives one, it becomes his responsibility ?
> I'll try to get one.
>
> Thanks
>
> >
> >>
> >> Erick
> >>
> >> Le 18 déc. 2013 à 15:33, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> a écrit :
> >>
> >>> We can ask on legal-discuss if you want to be certain, but I would
> guess
> >>> the answer is yes, we need permission from the owner. But Erick is
> >>> probably not wrong about the taking of screenshots either. My thought
> >>> experiment is this: If I was hired to paint the outside of a TV studio
> >>> with a particular brand of paint, I think it is ok for folks to take
> >>> pictures of me doing that and not have to obfuscate the paint bucket
> >>> that
> >>> has the paint brand on it and post it on their facebook sites. But
> that
> >>> doesn't mean the paint manufacturer as the right to say that TV studio
> >>> is
> >>> a customer on their website because that can sound like an endorsement.
> >>>
> >>> -Alex
> >>>
> >>> On 12/18/13 5:12 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks, Eric,
> >>>> But Apache tends to "wary" about legal stuff, so I prefer to ask for
> >>>> team
> >>>> advice.
> >>>>
> >>>> Maurice
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Message d'origine-----
> >>>> De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
> >>>> Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 13:39
> >>>> À : dev@flex.apache.org
> >>>> Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> i'm working on this project, and since it's a public website, i think
> >>>> it's absolutly not illegal to display screenshots.
> >>>>
> >>>> Erick
> >>>>
> >>>> Le 18 déc. 2013 à 13:34, Maurice Amsellem
> >>>> <ma...@systar.com> a
> >>>> écrit :
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A few app submissions (eg. "6play"
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what
> >>>>> looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the
> >>>>> screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French
> >>>>> TV
> >>>>> channel).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Maurice
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Maurice Amsellem
> >>>>> SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Erick Ghaumez
> >> RX Labz [ Design & Développement ]
> >>
> >> erick@rxlabz.com
> >> 06 21 72 31 15
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> Erick Ghaumez
> RX Labz [ Design & Développement ]
>
> erick@rxlabz.com
> 06 21 72 31 15
>
>
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Erick Ghaumez <er...@rxlabz.com>.
Le 18 déc. 2013 à 17:45, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> a écrit :
>
>
> On 12/18/13 7:00 AM, "Erick Ghaumez" <er...@rxlabz.com> wrote:
>
>> I obviously understand these legal doubts, but IMHO for the use of this 3
>> screenshots, it will be endless.
>> What kind of permission can be legal ? Is there a template document
>> somewhere ?
>> I can ask to the M6Web's CTO ( M6Web is the subsidiary company which is
>> in charge of digital projects ), but will it be legally good enough ?
>> Does Apache need a CEO or lawyer/notary validated document ?
>> Plus, since M6 is a french Group, it will depends on french laws...
>> I will tell them that I added 6play in the Apache Flex showcase list, if
>> it¹s a problem for them I¹ll warn you. Does this sounds ok for you ?
> Yes, contact whoever actually owns this work and notify them that you
> would like to put their site on our showcase, and that you'll need to
> copy/paste their permission into a public JIRA issue. Then it is their
> responsibility to make sure the right person authorizes it. At Apache, we
> have a VP Branding who would do that. I don't know how big the owning
> company is, but they should know who can sign for them. Someone had to
> authorize the contract that is paying you, so they know how signing
> authority works.
:) sure, they probably know how signing authority works, but i don’t.
Sorry, i was maybe kind of naive to think I can just take some screenshots of my work and use it to try to promote the SDK I’d used to make it. Indeed, it’s my work, but not my property.
As I’ve said, the owner is « big » TV group, my contract is with a subsidiary company in charge of digital projects. I don’t know if the one who signs my contract is legally authorized to give this permission. But if I understand, if he gives one, it becomes his responsibility ?
I'll try to get one.
Thanks
>
>>
>> Erick
>>
>> Le 18 déc. 2013 à 15:33, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> a écrit :
>>
>>> We can ask on legal-discuss if you want to be certain, but I would guess
>>> the answer is yes, we need permission from the owner. But Erick is
>>> probably not wrong about the taking of screenshots either. My thought
>>> experiment is this: If I was hired to paint the outside of a TV studio
>>> with a particular brand of paint, I think it is ok for folks to take
>>> pictures of me doing that and not have to obfuscate the paint bucket
>>> that
>>> has the paint brand on it and post it on their facebook sites. But that
>>> doesn't mean the paint manufacturer as the right to say that TV studio
>>> is
>>> a customer on their website because that can sound like an endorsement.
>>>
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> On 12/18/13 5:12 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks, Eric,
>>>> But Apache tends to "wary" about legal stuff, so I prefer to ask for
>>>> team
>>>> advice.
>>>>
>>>> Maurice
>>>>
>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>> De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
>>>> Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 13:39
>>>> À : dev@flex.apache.org
>>>> Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> i'm working on this project, and since it's a public website, i think
>>>> it's absolutly not illegal to display screenshots.
>>>>
>>>> Erick
>>>>
>>>> Le 18 déc. 2013 à 13:34, Maurice Amsellem
>>>> <ma...@systar.com> a
>>>> écrit :
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> A few app submissions (eg. "6play"
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what
>>>>> looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the
>>>>> screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French
>>>>> TV
>>>>> channel).
>>>>>
>>>>> Maurice
>>>>>
>>>>> Maurice Amsellem
>>>>> SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Erick Ghaumez
>> RX Labz [ Design & Développement ]
>>
>> erick@rxlabz.com
>> 06 21 72 31 15
>>
>
Erick Ghaumez
RX Labz [ Design & Développement ]
erick@rxlabz.com
06 21 72 31 15
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 12/18/13 7:00 AM, "Erick Ghaumez" <er...@rxlabz.com> wrote:
>I obviously understand these legal doubts, but IMHO for the use of this 3
>screenshots, it will be endless.
>What kind of permission can be legal ? Is there a template document
>somewhere ?
>I can ask to the M6Web's CTO ( M6Web is the subsidiary company which is
>in charge of digital projects ), but will it be legally good enough ?
>Does Apache need a CEO or lawyer/notary validated document ?
>Plus, since M6 is a french Group, it will depends on french laws...
>I will tell them that I added 6play in the Apache Flex showcase list, if
>it¹s a problem for them I¹ll warn you. Does this sounds ok for you ?
Yes, contact whoever actually owns this work and notify them that you
would like to put their site on our showcase, and that you'll need to
copy/paste their permission into a public JIRA issue. Then it is their
responsibility to make sure the right person authorizes it. At Apache, we
have a VP Branding who would do that. I don't know how big the owning
company is, but they should know who can sign for them. Someone had to
authorize the contract that is paying you, so they know how signing
authority works.
>
>Erick
>
>Le 18 déc. 2013 à 15:33, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> a écrit :
>
>> We can ask on legal-discuss if you want to be certain, but I would guess
>> the answer is yes, we need permission from the owner. But Erick is
>> probably not wrong about the taking of screenshots either. My thought
>> experiment is this: If I was hired to paint the outside of a TV studio
>> with a particular brand of paint, I think it is ok for folks to take
>> pictures of me doing that and not have to obfuscate the paint bucket
>>that
>> has the paint brand on it and post it on their facebook sites. But that
>> doesn't mean the paint manufacturer as the right to say that TV studio
>>is
>> a customer on their website because that can sound like an endorsement.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 12/18/13 5:12 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks, Eric,
>>> But Apache tends to "wary" about legal stuff, so I prefer to ask for
>>>team
>>> advice.
>>>
>>> Maurice
>>>
>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>> De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
>>> Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 13:39
>>> À : dev@flex.apache.org
>>> Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> i'm working on this project, and since it's a public website, i think
>>> it's absolutly not illegal to display screenshots.
>>>
>>> Erick
>>>
>>> Le 18 déc. 2013 à 13:34, Maurice Amsellem
>>><ma...@systar.com> a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> A few app submissions (eg. "6play"
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what
>>>> looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
>>>>
>>>> Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the
>>>> screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French
>>>>TV
>>>> channel).
>>>>
>>>> Maurice
>>>>
>>>> Maurice Amsellem
>>>> SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>Erick Ghaumez
>RX Labz [ Design & Développement ]
>
>erick@rxlabz.com
>06 21 72 31 15
>
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com>.
OK for me.
Also, can you include a small copyright notice in the description, something like "M6, 6Ter, W9 and 6play are registered trademarks of .... ".
thanks
-----Message d'origine-----
De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 16:01
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
I obviously understand these legal doubts, but IMHO for the use of this 3 screenshots, it will be endless.
What kind of permission can be legal ? Is there a template document somewhere ?
I can ask to the M6Web's CTO ( M6Web is the subsidiary company which is in charge of digital projects ), but will it be legally good enough ? Does Apache need a CEO or lawyer/notary validated document ?
Plus, since M6 is a french Group, it will depends on french laws...
I will tell them that I added 6play in the Apache Flex showcase list, if it's a problem for them I'll warn you. Does this sounds ok for you ?
Erick
Le 18 déc. 2013 à 15:33, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> a écrit :
> We can ask on legal-discuss if you want to be certain, but I would
> guess the answer is yes, we need permission from the owner. But Erick
> is probably not wrong about the taking of screenshots either. My
> thought experiment is this: If I was hired to paint the outside of a
> TV studio with a particular brand of paint, I think it is ok for folks
> to take pictures of me doing that and not have to obfuscate the paint
> bucket that has the paint brand on it and post it on their facebook
> sites. But that doesn't mean the paint manufacturer as the right to
> say that TV studio is a customer on their website because that can sound like an endorsement.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 12/18/13 5:12 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Eric,
>> But Apache tends to "wary" about legal stuff, so I prefer to ask for
>> team advice.
>>
>> Maurice
>>
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
>> Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 13:39 À : dev@flex.apache.org
>> Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> i'm working on this project, and since it's a public website, i think
>> it's absolutly not illegal to display screenshots.
>>
>> Erick
>>
>> Le 18 déc. 2013 à 13:34, Maurice Amsellem
>> <ma...@systar.com> a écrit :
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> A few app submissions (eg. "6play"
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what
>>> looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
>>>
>>> Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the
>>> screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French
>>> TV channel).
>>>
>>> Maurice
>>>
>>> Maurice Amsellem
>>> SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
>>>
>>
>
Erick Ghaumez
RX Labz [ Design & Développement ]
erick@rxlabz.com
06 21 72 31 15
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com>.
Done. (bot update pending)
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 17:49
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Yes, that would probably be the safe thing to do.
Thanks and sorry for the hassle,
-Alex
On 12/18/13 8:43 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
wrote:
>I undestand.
>
>FYI, the app is already included in the showcase, as I read your email
>after.
>Shall I withdraw it temporarily while waiting for the legal stuff to be
>fixed.?
>
>Maurice
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com] Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre
>2013 17:33 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal
>aspects
>
>IMO, it is not a good idea to violate copyright and trademark law and
>wait to see if you get caught, even if the remedy is simple.
>
>If you are a famous celebrity and happen to buy a particular brand of
>clothing and someone sees you wearing it in public, folks can probably
>tweet and Facebook that they saw you wearing it, but the company that
>makes the clothing probably can't put that on their site without your
>permission.
>
>I will start a thread on legal-discuss.
>
>If you want to read more, here is a links. Imagine that the TV company
>is Apache and we are the ones wanting to use the TV company's name on
>our site.
>
>-Alex
>
>[1] http://apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/
>
>
>On 12/18/13 7:29 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with
>>>the screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down
>>>requests from the owners.
>>
>>Also what I think. thanks
>>
>>
>>-----Message d'origine-----
>>De : Kessler CTR Mark J [mailto:mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil]
>>Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 16:11 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet
>>: RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>>
>>Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the
>>screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests
>>from the owners.
>>
>>-Mark
>>
>>
>
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
Yes, that would probably be the safe thing to do.
Thanks and sorry for the hassle,
-Alex
On 12/18/13 8:43 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
wrote:
>I undestand.
>
>FYI, the app is already included in the showcase, as I read your email
>after.
>Shall I withdraw it temporarily while waiting for the legal stuff to be
>fixed.?
>
>Maurice
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
>Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 17:33
>À : dev@flex.apache.org
>Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>
>IMO, it is not a good idea to violate copyright and trademark law and
>wait to see if you get caught, even if the remedy is simple.
>
>If you are a famous celebrity and happen to buy a particular brand of
>clothing and someone sees you wearing it in public, folks can probably
>tweet and Facebook that they saw you wearing it, but the company that
>makes the clothing probably can't put that on their site without your
>permission.
>
>I will start a thread on legal-discuss.
>
>If you want to read more, here is a links. Imagine that the TV company
>is Apache and we are the ones wanting to use the TV company's name on our
>site.
>
>-Alex
>
>[1] http://apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/
>
>
>On 12/18/13 7:29 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the
>>>screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests
>>>from the owners.
>>
>>Also what I think. thanks
>>
>>
>>-----Message d'origine-----
>>De : Kessler CTR Mark J [mailto:mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil]
>>Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 16:11 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet
>>: RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>>
>>Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the
>>screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests from
>>the owners.
>>
>>-Mark
>>
>>
>
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com>.
I undestand.
FYI, the app is already included in the showcase, as I read your email after.
Shall I withdraw it temporarily while waiting for the legal stuff to be fixed.?
Maurice
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 17:33
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
IMO, it is not a good idea to violate copyright and trademark law and wait to see if you get caught, even if the remedy is simple.
If you are a famous celebrity and happen to buy a particular brand of clothing and someone sees you wearing it in public, folks can probably tweet and Facebook that they saw you wearing it, but the company that makes the clothing probably can't put that on their site without your permission.
I will start a thread on legal-discuss.
If you want to read more, here is a links. Imagine that the TV company is Apache and we are the ones wanting to use the TV company's name on our site.
-Alex
[1] http://apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/
On 12/18/13 7:29 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
wrote:
>>Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the
>>screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests
>>from the owners.
>
>Also what I think. thanks
>
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Kessler CTR Mark J [mailto:mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil]
>Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 16:11 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet
>: RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>
>Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the
>screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests from
>the owners.
>
>-Mark
>
>
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
Also, remember, outside of the US, most - especially smaller - companies
don't have legal teams on retainer...
EdB
On Thursday, December 19, 2013, Kessler CTR Mark J wrote:
> It's not intentionally violated copyright and trademark. The person has
> submitted it to us with the understanding we are clear to use it. That's
> the good faith part... we are trusting them in what they are telling us is
> correct. There is no way to confirm everything we receive.
>
> -Mark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 11:33 AM
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>
> IMO, it is not a good idea to violate copyright and trademark law and wait
> to see if you get caught, even if the remedy is simple.
>
> If you are a famous celebrity and happen to buy a particular brand of
> clothing and someone sees you wearing it in public, folks can probably
> tweet and Facebook that they saw you wearing it, but the company that
> makes the clothing probably can't put that on their site without your
> permission.
>
> I will start a thread on legal-discuss.
>
> If you want to read more, here is a links. Imagine that the TV company is
> Apache and we are the ones wanting to use the TV company's name on our
> site.
>
> -Alex
>
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
I think enough information has been received that it would be hard to
claim we weren't aware.
-Alex
On 12/19/13 2:38 AM, "Kessler CTR Mark J" <ma...@usmc.mil>
wrote:
>It's not intentionally violated copyright and trademark. The person has
>submitted it to us with the understanding we are clear to use it. That's
>the good faith part... we are trusting them in what they are telling us
>is correct. There is no way to confirm everything we receive.
>
>-Mark
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 11:33 AM
>To: dev@flex.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>
>IMO, it is not a good idea to violate copyright and trademark law and wait
>to see if you get caught, even if the remedy is simple.
>
>If you are a famous celebrity and happen to buy a particular brand of
>clothing and someone sees you wearing it in public, folks can probably
>tweet and Facebook that they saw you wearing it, but the company that
>makes the clothing probably can't put that on their site without your
>permission.
>
>I will start a thread on legal-discuss.
>
>If you want to read more, here is a links. Imagine that the TV company is
>Apache and we are the ones wanting to use the TV company's name on our
>site.
>
>-Alex
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Kessler CTR Mark J <ma...@usmc.mil>.
It's not intentionally violated copyright and trademark. The person has submitted it to us with the understanding we are clear to use it. That's the good faith part... we are trusting them in what they are telling us is correct. There is no way to confirm everything we receive.
-Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 11:33 AM
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
IMO, it is not a good idea to violate copyright and trademark law and wait
to see if you get caught, even if the remedy is simple.
If you are a famous celebrity and happen to buy a particular brand of
clothing and someone sees you wearing it in public, folks can probably
tweet and Facebook that they saw you wearing it, but the company that
makes the clothing probably can't put that on their site without your
permission.
I will start a thread on legal-discuss.
If you want to read more, here is a links. Imagine that the TV company is
Apache and we are the ones wanting to use the TV company's name on our
site.
-Alex
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
IMO, it is not a good idea to violate copyright and trademark law and wait
to see if you get caught, even if the remedy is simple.
If you are a famous celebrity and happen to buy a particular brand of
clothing and someone sees you wearing it in public, folks can probably
tweet and Facebook that they saw you wearing it, but the company that
makes the clothing probably can't put that on their site without your
permission.
I will start a thread on legal-discuss.
If you want to read more, here is a links. Imagine that the TV company is
Apache and we are the ones wanting to use the TV company's name on our
site.
-Alex
[1] http://apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/
On 12/18/13 7:29 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
wrote:
>>Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the
>>screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests from
>>the owners.
>
>Also what I think. thanks
>
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Kessler CTR Mark J [mailto:mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil]
>Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 16:11
>À : dev@flex.apache.org
>Objet : RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>
>Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the
>screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests from
>the owners.
>
>-Mark
>
>
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com>.
>Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests from the owners.
Also what I think. thanks
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Kessler CTR Mark J [mailto:mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil]
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 16:11
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests from the owners.
-Mark
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Kessler CTR Mark J <ma...@usmc.mil>.
Maybe we should add them in good faith of being in compliance with the screen shots and just remove any based on valid take down requests from the owners.
-Mark
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Erick Ghaumez <er...@rxlabz.com>.
I obviously understand these legal doubts, but IMHO for the use of this 3 screenshots, it will be endless.
What kind of permission can be legal ? Is there a template document somewhere ?
I can ask to the M6Web's CTO ( M6Web is the subsidiary company which is in charge of digital projects ), but will it be legally good enough ? Does Apache need a CEO or lawyer/notary validated document ?
Plus, since M6 is a french Group, it will depends on french laws...
I will tell them that I added 6play in the Apache Flex showcase list, if it’s a problem for them I’ll warn you. Does this sounds ok for you ?
Erick
Le 18 déc. 2013 à 15:33, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> a écrit :
> We can ask on legal-discuss if you want to be certain, but I would guess
> the answer is yes, we need permission from the owner. But Erick is
> probably not wrong about the taking of screenshots either. My thought
> experiment is this: If I was hired to paint the outside of a TV studio
> with a particular brand of paint, I think it is ok for folks to take
> pictures of me doing that and not have to obfuscate the paint bucket that
> has the paint brand on it and post it on their facebook sites. But that
> doesn't mean the paint manufacturer as the right to say that TV studio is
> a customer on their website because that can sound like an endorsement.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 12/18/13 5:12 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Eric,
>> But Apache tends to "wary" about legal stuff, so I prefer to ask for team
>> advice.
>>
>> Maurice
>>
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
>> Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 13:39
>> À : dev@flex.apache.org
>> Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> i'm working on this project, and since it's a public website, i think
>> it's absolutly not illegal to display screenshots.
>>
>> Erick
>>
>> Le 18 déc. 2013 à 13:34, Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com> a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> A few app submissions (eg. "6play"
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what
>>> looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
>>>
>>> Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the
>>> screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French TV
>>> channel).
>>>
>>> Maurice
>>>
>>> Maurice Amsellem
>>> SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
>>>
>>
>
Erick Ghaumez
RX Labz [ Design & Développement ]
erick@rxlabz.com
06 21 72 31 15
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com>.
Thanks Alex,
I will then include the screenshots and the app in showcase.
We could then withdraw them easily in case someone complains.
Maurice
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 15:33
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
We can ask on legal-discuss if you want to be certain, but I would guess the answer is yes, we need permission from the owner. But Erick is probably not wrong about the taking of screenshots either. My thought experiment is this: If I was hired to paint the outside of a TV studio with a particular brand of paint, I think it is ok for folks to take pictures of me doing that and not have to obfuscate the paint bucket that has the paint brand on it and post it on their facebook sites. But that doesn't mean the paint manufacturer as the right to say that TV studio is a customer on their website because that can sound like an endorsement.
-Alex
On 12/18/13 5:12 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
wrote:
>Thanks, Eric,
>But Apache tends to "wary" about legal stuff, so I prefer to ask for
>team advice.
>
>Maurice
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
>Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 13:39 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet
>: Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>
>Hi,
>
>i'm working on this project, and since it's a public website, i think
>it's absolutly not illegal to display screenshots.
>
>Erick
>
>Le 18 déc. 2013 à 13:34, Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com>
>a écrit :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> A few app submissions (eg. "6play"
>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what
>>looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
>>
>> Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the
>>screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French
>>TV channel).
>>
>> Maurice
>>
>> Maurice Amsellem
>> SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
>>
>
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
We can ask on legal-discuss if you want to be certain, but I would guess
the answer is yes, we need permission from the owner. But Erick is
probably not wrong about the taking of screenshots either. My thought
experiment is this: If I was hired to paint the outside of a TV studio
with a particular brand of paint, I think it is ok for folks to take
pictures of me doing that and not have to obfuscate the paint bucket that
has the paint brand on it and post it on their facebook sites. But that
doesn't mean the paint manufacturer as the right to say that TV studio is
a customer on their website because that can sound like an endorsement.
-Alex
On 12/18/13 5:12 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <ma...@systar.com>
wrote:
>Thanks, Eric,
>But Apache tends to "wary" about legal stuff, so I prefer to ask for team
>advice.
>
>Maurice
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
>Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 13:39
>À : dev@flex.apache.org
>Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
>
>Hi,
>
>i'm working on this project, and since it's a public website, i think
>it's absolutly not illegal to display screenshots.
>
>Erick
>
>Le 18 déc. 2013 à 13:34, Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com> a
>écrit :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> A few app submissions (eg. "6play"
>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what
>>looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
>>
>> Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the
>>screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French TV
>>channel).
>>
>> Maurice
>>
>> Maurice Amsellem
>> SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
>>
>
RE: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com>.
Thanks, Eric,
But Apache tends to "wary" about legal stuff, so I prefer to ask for team advice.
Maurice
-----Message d'origine-----
De : rx labz [mailto:rxlabz@gmail.com] De la part de Erick Ghaumez
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 13:39
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Hi,
i'm working on this project, and since it's a public website, i think it's absolutly not illegal to display screenshots.
Erick
Le 18 déc. 2013 à 13:34, Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com> a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> A few app submissions (eg. "6play" https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
>
> Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French TV channel).
>
> Maurice
>
> Maurice Amsellem
> SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
>
Re: Flex Showcase legal aspects
Posted by Erick Ghaumez <er...@rxlabz.com>.
Hi,
i’m working on this project, and since it’s a public website, i think it’s absolutly not illegal to display screenshots.
Erick
Le 18 déc. 2013 à 13:34, Maurice Amsellem <ma...@systar.com> a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> A few app submissions (eg. "6play" https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34005 ) are made by what looks like developers sub-contracting for another company.
>
> Do you think there is a legal issue to include these apps (eg. the screenshots) without the permission of the owning company (m6 French TV channel).
>
> Maurice
>
> Maurice Amsellem
> SYSTAR R&D - BusinessBridgeFX
>