License for application name and logos (Was: Creative Commons license for pictures)

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at
Thu Sep 29 16:50:32 UTC 2005

On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 12:22 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 9/29/05, Christian Jodar <tian at> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > First discussion was about having part of a package under another license than
> > GPL (used for source code). Even if some points are clearer now, I think
> > another discussion should begin about license for an application logo.
> trademark and copyright are different concepts. Please don't confuse
> them. The problem you and the gcflims project are having with
> contributed artwork has absolutely nothing to do with trademark.
... and copyright and licenses are different concepts, too.

A "Copyright notice" does not imply any license. Conversely, seeing one
explicitly informs you that somebody might restrict your rights in
(re-)using his work.


> > So if in my application I don't use reference to a Creative Commons or Free
> > Art license but only says : *Name and logo copyrighted* it should be OK. Isn't
> > it?
> No...absolutely not.


>> Last point I'd like to mention is that the U.S. law tells that a work
>> is automatically copyrighted when it is made. 

It's not US law, it's international law (The Berne Convention), which
applies to all countries having signed the Berne Convention. In some
countries (Definitely Germany[1], probably France, and likely in many
other EU member states) even stricter national regulations/laws apply.


[1] In Germany, Open Source Software in many cases qualifies as
"creative work" and therefore falls under the same regulations as
"artwork". E.g. copyrights on "creative work" are non-assignable in
Germany (and probably many other countries).

More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list