Patch 4.10 - Development Updates by Daidalos Team

[swiss]

Originally Posted by brando

A copyright issue which reared its head quite a few years ago. Discussion and speculation about it are not encouraged, 'nuff said.

B

Maybe it's time to discuss it again?

It seems they changed their Trademark Licensing Policy

Trademark Licensing Policy

TRADEMARK LICENSE
FOR USE WITH PHOTOGRAPHS, ILLUSTRATIONS AND PAINTINGS
NOT OWNED BY NORTHROP GRUMMAN

Background: Northrop Grumman Corporation recognizes that the copyright in a photograph, illustration or painting of a vehicle is owned by the photographer, illustrator or artist, respectively (absent a contractual arrangement otherwise). At the same time, Northrop Grumman, as the manufacturer, owns the trademarks (e.g. "F-14", "Corsair," "Enterprise") in the vehicles it makes. Under the trademark laws of the United States and other countries, a trademark owner risks losing trademark rights if others use those trademarks without permission.

Purpose: Northrop Grumman respects and appreciates the creative talents of the photographic and artistic communities. Northrop Grumman desires to promote the use of its trademarks with photographs, illustrations and paintings by granting a free license to photographers and artists so that Northrop Grumman can maintain its trademark rights while at the same time being minimally intrusive.

License Terms:

1. Northrop Grumman hereby grants a free license to photographers and artists to use Northrop Grumman’s trademarks with his/her photographs, illustrations or paintings, including with any that are sold.
2. The photographer or artist agrees that the quality of his/her photographs, illustrations or paintings that use Northrop Grumman trademarks will: (a) be at least equal to the standards commonly used by the professional artistic and photographic community for illustrations, paintings, and photographs, (b) display the correct name of the Northrop Grumman vehicle(s), and (c) not disparage the name or reputation of Northrop Grumman or violate any laws.
3. The free license does not apply to the use of Northrop Grumman’s trademarks in books, posters or calendars in runs that exceed 5,000. Likewise, the free license does not apply to use of Northrop Grumman’s trademarks for any form of merchandise such as toys, models, clothing, coffee cups, notebooks, electronic or video games, etc. Licenses for such uses are available from

Director, Intellectual Asset Management
Northrop Grumman Corporation
1840 Century Park East
Los Angeles, CA 90067

http://www.northropgrumman.com/ipm/tmpolicy.html

[AndyJWest]

The free license does not apply to the use of Northrop Grumman’s trademarks in books, posters or calendars in runs that exceed 5,000. Likewise, the free license does not apply to use of Northrop Grumman’s trademarks for any form of merchandise such as toys, models, clothing, coffee cups, notebooks, electronic or video games, etc.

It doesn't look like the situation has changed. Northrop Grumman is still claiming to hold copyrights relating to 'electronic or video games'. In any case, as I understand it there was a legally-binding settlement reached, which presumably still stands.

Personally, I have serious doubts that Northrop Grumman's claims would stand up in court, but since it isn't my money to risk, I can't blame software developers for not taking them on. If NG want to erase themselves from history, that is their problem...

[swiss]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

It doesn't look like the situation has changed. Northrop Grumman is still claiming to hold copyrights relating to 'electronic or video games'. In any case, as I understand it there was a legally-binding settlement reached, which presumably still stands.

Personally, I have serious doubts that Northrop Grumman's claims would stand up in court, but since it isn't my money to risk, I can't blame software developers for not taking them on. If NG want to erase themselves from history, that is their problem...

Read again, it's about:

Likewise, the free license does not apply to use of Northrop Grumman’s trademarks for any form of merchandise such as toys, models, clothing, coffee cups, notebooks, electronic or video games, etc.

Ubi and 1C sold a commercial product - TD is not.
Pretty much changes everything.

[SaQSoN]

Originally Posted by swiss

Background: Northrop Grumman Corporation recognizes that the copyright in a photograph, illustration or painting of a vehicle is owned by the photographer, illustrator or artist, respectively (absent a contractual arrangement otherwise).

NG forced Ubi and 1C to sign a contract, which prohibits them from using images of vehicles to which NG owns copyright in the IL-2 game and it's add-ons.

Which means, 1C still can not use them in the game.

Plus, what AndyJWest said.

[Mysticpuma]

What aircraft did Northrop Grumman manufacture that may not show themselves in SoW updates?

That's a little forward thinking I know, but once the SoW simulation engine is released to third-parties (already has been I think), what aircraft will they not be able to have in SoW expansion packs for fear of treading on toes and being sued?

Just wondering how this may/could affect future developments?

Cheers, MP

[ElAurens]

Anything made by Northrop, Grumman, or any company they have acquired, ever. This takes in most of the US ship building business, so it would include a very large number of suface ships used by the US Navy in the second world war.

This was discussed at length when the issue first raised it's head at the release of Pacific Fighters. Following the NG corporate family tree would also mean that many ships used by the US in World War One would also be off limits.

Just invetigate N-G's website and trace the corporate history.

It will be a serious dent in the Korean war as well.

[PilotError]

Originally Posted by Mysticpuma

What aircraft did Northrop Grumman manufacture that may not show themselves in SoW updates?

That's a little forward thinking I know, but once the SoW simulation engine is released to third-parties (already has been I think), what aircraft will they not be able to have in SoW expansion packs for fear of treading on toes and being sued?

Just wondering how this may/could affect future developments?

Cheers, MP

I thought the N-G issue only applied to IL-2 and it's add ons.
Unfortunately this seems to include TD work as well.

But SoW is a totally new product, so hopefully it will not be included in the N-G legal contract.
Maybe just a lot of wishfull thinking on my part.

[swiss]

Jeez - is it so hard to understand?

If you make money using their some of their intellectual property, they want their fair share aka royalties.
Not more, not less.

Well, TD does not, that's why I think they could get NG's ok.

[csThor]

You have a few hundred thousand $$$ ready just in case NG doesn't follow your argument? No? We don't, either. As such it is simple - let sleeping dogs lie. TD won't touch anything NG-related as Oleg specifically asked us not to. End of discussion.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by csThor

You have a few hundred thousand $$$ ready just in case NG doesn't follow your argument? No? We don't, either. As such it is simple - let sleeping dogs lie. TD won't touch anything NG-related as Oleg specifically asked us not to. End of discussion.

No I just thought, maybe, someone could ask.

If there already are violations - then we better don't.