Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

blogs.kde.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 168 posts

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#91

Post by jacquesm »

polshaw wrote: post #38

This leads me to a legal question about GPL stuff.. Say the guys at KDE threw their full legal might behind this- what would happen to Sony? Obviously they would be required to change it (or include the GPL licence), but is that all? What kind of 'damages' could be claimed in such a situation?.. ie what is the risk to Sony in doing this. NB i'm using this (somewhat trivial) example to talk about GPL violation more br…

Sony would have to either stop using the Icon or they would have to attribute it according to the license.

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#92

Post by GhotiFish »

belorn wrote: post #83
jacquesm wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course she should be given the benefit of the doubt too. See, if you as an outsider want to make sure that all parties are held to the same standard then you should be willing to apply that standard to your worst enemy as well. Note that I am not in any way defending Sony or their conduct, I just want the same standard that I'd like to apply to downloading music to apply to this instance of possible copyright viol…

I agree that we should hold all parties to the same standard no matter who the party is, but commercial usage should add additional expectations from the defending party. Commercial use is commonly perceived as "worse" than if it's done for private/non-profit use. But my initial comment was mostly to acknowledge that we do not give the benefit of doubt to private persons, but we do to commercial entities. The law sho…

> there wouldn’t have been a single comment questioning the validity of the accusation.

did you mean something else? You could not of meant that.

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#93

Post by username3 »

more_original wrote: post #81
damian2000 wrote: post #79

I've got another less exciting reason how it ended up there... someone at Sony or one of their contractors found it on here: http://www.iconarchive.com/show/oxygen-icons-by-oxygen-icons... It says there "commercial usage allowed". They probably didn't even know it was from KDE.

Yes, commercial use is allowed, but the LGPL requires attribution. The site you give does link prominently to the LGPL license.

These sites don't.

http://www.tineye.com/search/20fd99e0d87a8d04e30b5c307d81b49...

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#94

Post by mbel »

stevewilhelm wrote: post #80

I think the real headline should be "Proof that at least one person at Sony has used KDE"

Not really, apart from the other software utilizing this icon, this "inspiration" might have come form a quick search [0] :(.

[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=preferences+icon&tbm=isc... (this particular icon is one of the topmost results in my surely personalized search)

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#95

Post by uxp »

damoncali wrote: post #70
whalesalad wrote: post #23

While this blows ... it's a bummer that companies keep getting blamed when things like this happen. Sure, at some point an employee is a reflection of a company but at the end of the day a person did this. It's easy to point the finger at a big company and use this as fud against them. But really... the correct title should be "Someone who works for Sony pirated KDE artwork."

I get what you're saying- this is almost certainly a case where one employee was either lazy or ignorant and just found a nice icon. Not a big deal. But, it was in the service of a company and the corporation is responsible for it. In a sane world, what that means is that someone from KDE would point it out to them, and Sony would say "Ooops. That was a mistake. We'll change it. Sorry.". Who knows what happens in the…

> it was in the service of a company and the corporation is responsible for it.

This a million times over. When I write code, or do a quick Google Image Search for a stupid icon to clean up a UI while I'm at work, I'm doing so in service of the company I work for. If my actions result in me and my company infringing upon someone else's copyrights, it is ultimately my company that is responsible for those actions. My company may retaliate against me (I'm pretty sure there's a "don't fuck up" clause in my work agreement), but my company cannot wash their hands and allow another company or individual to sue me directly for the violation anymore so than I can remove all the code I've written in their products on my last day of employment the same way I pack up the nic-nacs on my desk.

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#96

Post by jacquesm »

more_original wrote: post #81
damian2000 wrote: post #79

I've got another less exciting reason how it ended up there... someone at Sony or one of their contractors found it on here: http://www.iconarchive.com/show/oxygen-icons-by-oxygen-icons... It says there "commercial usage allowed". They probably didn't even know it was from KDE.

Yes, commercial use is allowed, but the LGPL requires attribution. The site you give does link prominently to the LGPL license.

> Yes, commercial use is allowed, but the LGPL requires attribution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_Licen...

http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html

Where does it say that, I can't find the word attribution on there?

Do you maybe mean the creative commons license?

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#97

Post by abrahamsen »

kenkam wrote: post #56

Such a shame Sony pirated their artwork. Also, such a shame the article introduces Sony as "the company who created Audio CDs which installed a rootkit on Windows computer to try to stop people copying music", as if Sony needed introduction, especially for people that read the KDE blog. Maybe it would have been more effective to point them out in a matter-of-fact way, tell them to stop or to comply with the licence,…

I thought at first it was a positive introduction: "the company who created Audio CDs".

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#98

Post by Fargren »

nollidge wrote: post #84
Fargren wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, "pirated" is probably not the right word for anything less than armed robbery of a boat. But lately it's been used as a synonym of "copyright infringement", so maybe it applies.

In the context of software, "piracy" has come to mean downloading and distributing copyrighted material. And I think it's fine to use it for that, even though it doesn't happen on the high seas (usually?). But this is more like plagiarism, although I'd be fine with calling it stealing or theft, which have a pretty broad meaning colloquially.

>>In the context of software, "piracy" has come to mean downloading and distributing copyrighted material.

Odd, I thought if I downloaded, say, a game from a warez site I would be branded a pirate even if I didn't distribute it afterwards.

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#99

Post by pornel »

jacquesm wrote: post #96
more_original wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, commercial use is allowed, but the LGPL requires attribution. The site you give does link prominently to the LGPL license.

> Yes, commercial use is allowed, but the LGPL requires attribution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_Licen... http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html Where does it say that, I can't find the word attribution on there? Do you maybe mean the creative commons license?

I think the OP may have been referring to 4a:

    a) Give prominent notice with each copy of the Combined Work that the Library is used in it and that the Library and its use are covered by this License.

Re: Sony Pirates KDE Artwork

#100

Post by iconfinder »

angry-hacker wrote: post #71
DanBC wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What search terms do you use to get this particular icon returned? [settings icon]["settings icon"][free settings icon] etc don't return it.

http://www.iconfinder.com/search/?q=settings Iconfinder is one the most popular ones around... so probably whoever is "responsible" for it used that kind of search engine. There it is: http://www.iconfinder.com/icondetails/8844/128/kit_settings_... with author, licence and all the info.

Hey, Iconfinder here :-)

We care a lot about stating the license clearly since it's essential to our business. Also if there is anything copyright infringing on our site we'll remove it immediately. As far as I can tell, this icon is created by the Oxygen team and the license information is correctly presented on our site.

Post reply on HN