RE: Not snazzy (was: New Unicode Savvy Logo)

Rick McGowan wrote:
> 2. It is unikely that the Unicode *logo* itself (i.e. the thing at 
> http://www.unicode.org/webscripts/logo60s2.gif) will be incorporated 
> directly in any image that people are allowed to put on their 
> websites, because to put the Unicode logo on a product or whatever
> requires a license agreement. I.e. the submissions from E. Trager
> are out of scope because they contain the Unicode logo on the
> left side.

As this comes from an Unicode official, I guess we should simply accept
it... Nevertheless, I wonder whether displaying the Unicode *logo* per se
has the same legal implication as displaying a *banner* which contains the
Unicode logo.

IMVHO, that seems like the difference between producing a T-shirt with the
Unicode logo and wearing it. In the first case, I must demonstrate that I
asked and obtained the permission from the trade-mark owner; in the second
case, I don't have to demonstrate anything (apart, maybe, that I did not
steal that piece of garment).

_ Marco


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode 
List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/