[Clipart] clipart Digest, Vol 72, Issue 20

[John Olsen]

On Mar 15, 2010, at 12:00 PM, clipart-request at lists.freedesktop.org wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/15/2010 12:53 AM, chovynz wrote:
>> Conversally, I would say that clipart of copyrighted designs (in the
>> physical) are ok. If we stuck to a hard line like "No clipart of a
>> copyrighted/recognisable brand of car" then we would have no clipart
>> whatsoever of any technology since everything is patented, and we would
>> have no clipart of any people without their express consent (which in
>> many cases is impossible to get). "Clipart" is different to "Designs".
> 
> For the record, you don't want to confuse patents with copyrights. 
> Patents, at least in the U.S., refer to unique solutions or methods to 
> solve problems or tasks. Patents also have a very short lifespan. In the 
> U.S. they are only intended to protect inventors so that they have a few 
> years to market their original product without being undercut by larger 
> existing companies/manufacturers. This isn't always the case due to the 
> U.S. patent system having been... hijacked. But it is the actual reason 
> for existence of patent protection.

An interesting side note to this is that drawings submitted to defend a patent are generally in the public domain by definition.   You can protect images if you explicitly place a copyright next to the image.  I have uploaded a number of images straight from patent documents to the library being sure that no copyright symbol appears.   More info: http://inventblog.com/uspto/are-patent-drawings-public-domain.html

Johnny Automatic