sony Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

[f0rk_b0mb]

http://blogs.kde.org/2013/02/21/sony-pirates-kde-artwork

Sony, the company who created Audio CDs which installed a rootkit on Windows computer to try to stop people copying music has pirated KDE artwork. The preferences-system.png icon from Oxygen is on their Choose your Vaio webpages (next to configure) but impressively is also on the UEFI firmware should you boot up into Assist mode. Nowhere on their website terms of use does it list the LGPL 3 licence it may be copied under (It does say "Any unauthorised use or copying of site content, or use of site content which breaches these Terms (or their spirit) may violate trade mark, copyright and other proprietary rights, and have civil and criminal consequences" although it also says "You must seek and obtain the written consent the operator of this site before creating any link to this site" so I don't give that page any legal credit.) Should KDE e.V. and Nuno's Oxygen friends start a new business model by sueing them for everything they're worth?

Oxygen icon on left. "Choose your Vaio" web page fragment on right.

Personally, I think they should give credit to them. It shouldn't come down to a lawsuit--they'd just be burnning money they can use to write more OSS. What do you guys think?

[Noir Angel]

The icon under Software is also an exact copy of the default icon for .MSU files in Windows 7, I wonder if they paid Microsoft for a license to use that icon

[tiagosilva29]

If the content is licensed, you must abide with its license.

[TurboShrimp]

wait I thought Linux was all about open source , free to edit / change / pass along ect.. ect..

[sanctified Veteran]

wait I thought Linux GNU was all about open source , free to edit / change / pass along ect.. ect..

GNU/Linux, yes, as long as you give proper credits.

Is that wrong?

[fusi0n]

^^ Not when you are profiting from it

[TurboShrimp]

its silly over just an icon.

if you visit Linux mint website you don't see them saying " hey thanks Ubuntu "

or UBUNTU under the hood . lol

if so you really need to search the site to find out.

point is its silly and either side is making money from it

^^ Not when you are profiting from it

do you have a source that shows how much money sony has made from the use of that icon ?

[sanctified Veteran]

its silly over just an icon.

if you visit Linux mint website you don't see them saying " hey thanks Ubuntu "

or UBUNTU under the hood . lol

if so you really need to search the site to find out.

point is its silly and either side is making money from it

do you have a source that shows how much money sony has made from the use of that icon ?

If you think this is just over an icon you're missing the point.

[tiagosilva29]

TurboShrimp, this is not about giving credit. This is about simply not following the terms of a license.

Here is a abridgement to help you understant the license in question: http://www.tldrlegal.com/l/LGPL3

[.Neo]

Did KDE get permission from Adobe to use their Acrobat logo for PDF files? As far as I know KDE doesn't ship with an official version of Adobe Acrobat.

[sanctified Veteran]

Did KDE get permission from Adobe to use their Acrobat logo for PDF files? As far as I know KDE doesn't ship with an official version of Adobe Acrobat.

Since the open standarization of PDF back in 2008 Adobe also allowed the reproduction of the logo.

[Noir Angel]

Images would set an interesting legal precedent... how does one provide the source code for an image?

[tim_s]

To be honest here,

This seems to be more about a mistake from a developer than Sony actively abusing their power. Clearly Sony has the capacity to make up a "icon" - to say otherwise is just silly. Not saying that Sony is or is not an "Evil" corporation but in this manner I am sure if any financial penalty is required by KDE, the matter will be properly handled.

Images would set an interesting legal precedent... how does one provide the source code for an image?

Images are protected under the copyright act.

[.Neo]

Since the open standarization of PDF back in 2008 Adobe also allowed the reproduction of the logo.

Fair enough. I still find the whole thing questionable since KDE took quite a few ideas from Windows Aero.

[Noir Angel]

I was of the opinion that most artwork included with open source projects like Linux distributions was free for use and redistribution?

[tim_s]

Fair enough. I still find the whole thing questionable since KDE took quite a few ideas from Windows Aero.

It is not questionable, this is a person or group who found that Sony used a KDE image. KDE has not taken any action according to the information.

[Astra.Xtreme]

Images would set an interesting legal precedent... how does one provide the source code for an image?

I'm sure they could provide the binary breakdown of it. ;)

[Anibal P]

I was of the opinion that most artwork included with open source projects like Linux distributions was free for use and redistribution?

You still have to give credit and follow any other conditions of the license since there's different clauses for commercial and private uses, it's not a free for all and anarchy in the FOSS world, no matter what the media says

[Noir Angel]

Fair enough. I still find the whole thing questionable since KDE took quite a few ideas from Windows Aero.

It's irrelevant. Adobe gave their permission for that image to be used, the permission of the KDE developers asked. Usually I tend to find Linux developers are pretty good where sharing their creations are concerned. As for the other point you made... so what? Very few pieces of software as complex as a Linux window manager or operating system will be built without using some of the competition's ideas it's just the way computing works.

You still have to give credit and follow any other conditions of the license since there's different clauses for commercial and private uses, it's not a free for all and anarchy in the FOSS world, no matter what the media says

Understood, I understand the basics of how the GPL works but in truth I rarely read licensing agreements :p

[.Neo]

It is not questionable, this is a person or group who found that Sony used a KDE image. KDE has not taken any action according to the information.

I wasn't pointing a finger at KDE. I find the complaint in general questionable.

As for the other point you made... so what? Very few pieces of software as complex as a Linux window manager or operating system will be built without using some of the competition's ideas it's just the way computing works.

Right, and if that's how computing works you can ask yourself whether you should make a big fuss about an icon being used on a fairly low-profile part of a third-party website. Surely if KDE can "borrow" major parts of the Windows Aero experience Sony can "borrow" an icon. You take some, you loose some.

[n_K]

I wasn't pointing a finger at KDE. I find the complaint in general questionable.

Well not really, if I went and slapped the windows logo on something I sell without permission, I'd expect to be sued.

[Noir Angel]

It's just the opinion of a third party. Judging KDE's position before they voice it is a bit foolish would you not agree?

[.Neo]

It's just the opinion of a third party. Judging KDE's position before they voice it is a bit foolish would you not agree?

I'm responding to the opinion of said third party. I'm not judging KDE's currently non-existent official position in any way.

[f0rk_b0mb]

Fair enough. I still find the whole thing questionable since KDE took quite a few ideas from Windows Aero.

KDE had Aero before Windows did. KDE 4.0 (released 2006...Vista was 2007 if I remember right) had Aero like boarders. Compiz (the window decorator) has been around, in one form or another since the early 00's.

[ichi]

^^ Not when you are profiting from it

Whether you profit or not is irrelevant. There's no distinction in the license between redistributing for money or for free: you either have a license to redistribute (if you abide by the license terms) or you don't.