If I buy a ford truck, and jack it up, put a light bar on it, custom paint it, tweek the motor and do all sorts of wacky stuff Ford doesn't sue me for violating their "IP". They don't ask me to take the name off of it. In fact, if I make kits to modify the vehicles they are happy as a clam, as it sells more cars.
If you make a kit and sell it as Above's Kit for Ford Trucks, that's OK. If you sell it as Ford Truck Kit, Ford would most likely claim a trademark violation. This is the LegOS distinction.
Also, if you published how you tweaked your engine and GM used that info to improve Chevy trucks, there may be a problem.
Also, Lego seems to be worried that adding that light bar may make the truck unsafe and reflect badly upon Ford.
If I buy a house, add an addition, change the colors on the walls, swap out the heater, and then tell people it's a "Toll Bothers Hose" they don't sue me for violating their IP.
Because you haven't violated their IP. If you took the floor plan of your house, modified it and posted it on the web as a Toll Brothers' floor plan, they'd have room for trademark infringement.
And if Above Builders, Inc. used that new floor plan to build homes, there could also be a problem.
Again, if your house comes crashing down because of your modifications, don't blame Toll Brothers.
Actually, there is a site called lawguru.com that does exactly what you suggest. There may be others. I've used them a couple of times and have received good answers. It certainly would be a good place to go for the original poster because their answer certainly lies in the specifics of their case.
I don't feel that there is too much to worry about in this area. If someone chose to use an Application Service Provider (like onlinephotolab) that used proprietary extensions to free software, they would be making a similar decision to use an ASP that used completely proprietary software. If they want to make that mistake, presumably they will pay for it later. Also, ASPs would lose benefits of Open Source. Any of the modification they made would not be subject to peer review. They would also not benefit from others extending their extensions. Finally, I believe ASPs will survive mostly on the "Service" aspect, not the "Application" aspect. In many cases now, and I expect in the future, ASPs would use the same software as their competitor, but differentiate themselves on the level of service they provide.
Interactivity is not the key to the web, hypertext is. It's what makes the web, the web. Newspapers can truly benefit from this by linking to information that would be too cumbersome to include with the actual story. JonKatz implies that by simply expanding the "Letters to the Editor" section, a newspaper will launch itself into the internet. Wrong. Making use of the hypertext ability of the web is the surest way to distinguish a true internet newspaper from a paper one. And I can't get over the irony of posting my "Letter to the Editor" without a hyperlink.
Slashdot Mirror
If you make a kit and sell it as Above's Kit for Ford Trucks, that's OK. If you sell it as Ford Truck Kit, Ford would most likely claim a trademark violation. This is the LegOS distinction.
Also, if you published how you tweaked your engine and GM used that info to improve Chevy trucks, there may be a problem.
Also, Lego seems to be worried that adding that light bar may make the truck unsafe and reflect badly upon Ford.
If I buy a house, add an addition, change the colors on the walls, swap out the heater, and then tell people it's a "Toll Bothers Hose" they don't sue me for violating their IP.
Because you haven't violated their IP. If you took the floor plan of your house, modified it and posted it on the web as a Toll Brothers' floor plan, they'd have room for trademark infringement.
And if Above Builders, Inc. used that new floor plan to build homes, there could also be a problem.
Again, if your house comes crashing down because of your modifications, don't blame Toll Brothers.
Actually, there is a site called lawguru.com that does exactly what you suggest. There may be others. I've used them a couple of times and have received good answers. It certainly would be a good place to go for the original poster because their answer certainly lies in the specifics of their case.
I don't feel that there is too much to worry about in this area. If someone chose to use an Application Service Provider (like onlinephotolab) that used proprietary extensions to free software, they would be making a similar decision to use an ASP that used completely proprietary software. If they want to make that mistake, presumably they will pay for it later. Also, ASPs would lose benefits of Open Source. Any of the modification they made would not be subject to peer review. They would also not benefit from others extending their extensions. Finally, I believe ASPs will survive mostly on the "Service" aspect, not the "Application" aspect. In many cases now, and I expect in the future, ASPs would use the same software as their competitor, but differentiate themselves on the level of service they provide.
Interactivity is not the key to the web, hypertext is. It's what makes the web, the web. Newspapers can truly benefit from this by linking to information that would be too cumbersome to include with the actual story. JonKatz implies that by simply expanding the "Letters to the Editor" section, a newspaper will launch itself into the internet. Wrong. Making use of the hypertext ability of the web is the surest way to distinguish a true internet newspaper from a paper one.
And I can't get over the irony of posting my "Letter to the Editor" without a hyperlink.