Trademarked icons in digikam?

[Simon Frei]

I believe it is fine to use the official (!) logos. Dropbox has a
paragraph that essentially describes our function:

    You may only use the Dropbox name and logo in your app to identify
or direct a user to a Dropbox integration or functionality. For example,
you may use a Dropbox logo and "Save to Dropbox" text on a button to
prompt a user to save a file to Dropbox.
    https://www.dropbox.com/developers/reference/branding-guide

For facebook I couldn't find something that clear, for obvious reasons
their documentation mostly talks about websites, sharing and linking to
organization facebook pages. But the following also seems very close:

    Do only use the "f" logo to refer to:
    [...]
     - Your product’s integration with Facebook, such as "For use with
Facebook"
   https://en.facebookbrand.com/assets/f-logo

I would just always use the official logo, if provided, and assume it's
fine as we direct users to their services in good faith. All the docs I
have seen are very clear, that they do not want any alterations of their
logos or self-creations, that look similar to their logo - so using
something that looks like the logo but isn't really is a bad idea.

On 11/05/18 14:04, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> In all case, if the icons are problematic from the right viewpoint, we
> can always drop the icons and replace it by the generic "internet" one
> from Oxygen or another set. there is not technical issue to process
> these changes.
>
> Gilles
>
> 2018-05-11 12:34 GMT+02:00 Maik Qualmann <metzpinguin at gmail.com
> <mailto:metzpinguin at gmail.com>>:
>
>     If I look through the icons here under openSUSE, I find some in
>     choqok, breeze
>     or oxygen5. Are these icons also problematic? If I understand the
>     guidelines
>     correctly, they must not be changed in appearance. We could change
>     that. I was
>     recently porting Dropbox to new API and read the guidelines and I
>     think the
>     use of Dropbox icons is okay. Dropbox has activated the digiKam
>     uploader
>     without complaint. Which solution do you think would be the right one?
>
>     Maik
>
>     Am Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2018, 13:39:44 CEST schrieb Fabian Vogt:
>     > Hi,
>     >
>     > Am Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2018, 13:05:12 CEST schrieb Gilles Caulier:
>     > > In fact the icons are exactly the same than kipi-plugins,
>     which is already
>     > > packaged.
>     >
>     > Yes, but it has the exact same issue. We just weren't aware of
>     it before the
>     > move made us look at the icons.
>     >
>     > > The icons are not the same than trademarked one, of course.
>     There are just
>     > > an imitation with severals differences, as i can see.
>     >
>     > That's actually worse.
>     >
>     > Let me quote the Facebook brand guidelines:
>     >
>     > "Don’t modify Facebook brand assets in any way"
>     > "Don't use trademarks, names, domain names, logos or other
>     content that
>     > imitates or could be confused with Facebook"
>     > "Don't use any icons, images or trademarks to represent Facebook
>     other than
>     > what is found on this resource center"
>     >
>     > (https://en.facebookbrand.com/guidelines/brand
>     <https://en.facebookbrand.com/guidelines/brand>, "Don'ts" section)
>     >
>     > I would expect the guidelines for the other logos to be the same.
>     >
>     > Cheers,
>     > Fabian
>     >
>     > > Gilles Caulier
>     > >
>     > > 2018-05-10 10:51 GMT+02:00 Luca Beltrame <lbeltrame at kde.org
>     <mailto:lbeltrame at kde.org>>:
>     > > > Hello,
>     > > >
>     > > > when digikam deprecated the software collection and merged
>     the data in
>     > > > the
>     > > > main repository, I noticed, while packaging git snapshots
>     for openSUSE,
>     > > > that
>     > > > there are a number of potential trademarked icons in the
>     repository
>     > > > (core/
>     > > > data/icons):
>     > > >
>     > > > - dropbox
>     > > > - facebook
>     > > > - flickr
>     > > > - gdrive
>     > > > - imageshack
>     > > >
>     > > > and others.
>     > > >
>     > > > Were those icons put there in accordance to the trademark
>     guidelines of
>     > > > the
>     > > > respective services? Otherwise, at least the most conscious
>     > > > distributions
>     > > > won't be able to distribute digikam due to possible
>     trademark usage
>     > > > violations.
>     > > >
>     > > > --
>     > > > Luca Beltrame - KDE Forums team
>     > > > KDE Science supporter
>     > > > GPG key ID: A29D259B
>
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-devel/attachments/20180511/d32b5589/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 862 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-devel/attachments/20180511/d32b5589/attachment.sig>