In Trademark News: American Airlines has filed a infringement lawsuit against search engine giant Google, that if successful could fundamentally change the way search engines, and more importantly their pay-per-click advertising services, work.

In the suit, American claims Google sells the airline company’s trademarks to other websites that use them, via Adwords, to divert potential customers away from the official American Airlines website. Though the suit was launched last summer, it’s just starting to see the inside of a courtroom, and final motions are being requested by the judge.

Personally, I’m in favor of this - not much point in having a trademark registered if your competition can simply pay a few cents and use it against you. We’ve been having this problem for years, with other logo design companies setting up Adword keywords using The Logo Factory as a search trigger. Despite being a nuisance, didn’t figure there was much we could do.

Many (with more legal smarts than I) have opined that AA may not have a leg to stand on because of the generic nature - American & Airlines - of their trademark. Others think that this is just the beginning, as corporate giants try to control the use of their intellectual property on the web. In any case, worthwhile watching this one as it develops - you can view the ongoing battle here.

Lot of frothing going on in the design community, revolving around an alleged bit of scumbaggery - The Orphan Works Act - sitting in front of Congress. Summed up - an Orphan Work is to be considered any creative work of art where the artist or copyright owner has lost control of their copyright, by design, passage of adequate time (nothing new), or by lack of proper registration (very new) and when folks who want to use the work haven’t been able to track down the original copyright owner (very, very new). Under international law, copyright protection on a creative work is automatic, and this does seem to be at odds with standing conventions.

I had a skim read of the legal-heavy document and it would seem to suggest that under certain conditions, people can use someone else’s artwork, writing or music without permission. Or more importantly payment. Unless the work is registered with some yet-to-be-built database. Sounding rather draconian, Bill H.R. 5889, as the Orphan Works proposal is formally known, has stirred up a veritable hornet’s nest among creative types. Not surprising really. Award winning animator Mark Simon has a go - quoting such luminaries as Roger Dean (designer of the Yes logo and discussed in our best band logos feature). Dean has this to say about a similar effort across the pond -

This will devastate the livelihood of artists, photographers and designers in a number of ways. That at the behest of a few hugely rich corporations who got rich by selling art that they played no part in the making of, the U.S. and U.K. governments are changing the copyright laws to protect the infringer instead of the creator. This is unjust, culturally destructive and commercial lunacy. This will not just hurt millions of artists around the world.

Pretty heavy stuff. I’ve always been a huge fan of Dean, and I’d generally respect his opinion on anything to do with design. Admittedly I’m not too up on all this, so I’m going to root around the interwebs to see what’s what. I’ve found a load of resources for illustrators and designers that will take a month of Sundays to go through. Most designers, artists and illustrators seem to be falling squarely in the ‘nay’ camp. There’s people who are pro this bill - called themselves Save Orphan Works (the version in front of Congress is apparently a re-boot of an earlier attempt) who describe the new bill thusly;

Orphan works are — broadly speaking — any copyrighted works where the rights holder is hard to find. Because the cost of finding the owner is so high, creators can’t build on orphan works, even when they’d be willing to pay to use them. In many cases the works were abandoned because they no longer produced any income. In most cases, rights holders, once found, are delighted to have their work used.

Hmm. Not liking the sound of this ‘hard to find‘ routine. And because it’s too expensive to find the owner, copyright goes out the window? Not sure I’m hip with the ‘delighted to have their work used‘ deal either. There’s been many a time work from The Logo Factory, has been used without our permission. Delighted isn’t really the term I’d use to describe how we felt. Anyhoo, this Orphan Works plan certainly looks like it needs more investigation before I pull the fire-alarm.

Update: Hopping around a few links and found this. Plagiarism Today has a great form letter that designers opposed to Orphan Works can send their congresscritters. Also explains the rub to the bill in easy to understand language. And here’s a petition. There’s always a petition.

Not as important as missing the Mrs’ birthday, or forgetting our Anniversary (August 6, hon), but I totally missed out on World Graphics Day 2008, observed yesterday, April 27. Ah well, guess I’ll catch up next year - after all, the annual event has been running since 1995 (these folks not send out press releases to remind us ’slow on the uptake’ bloggers?). World Graphics Day is celebrated on this spring date, because that’s the day in 1963 when Icograda, the world body for graphic design, was founded. It is a day to celebrate the profession of communication design globally and according to whatever info I’ve been able to find helps “designers reflect and hope that our international network can contribute to a greater understanding between people and can help to build bridges where divides and inequities exist”. There ya go. So to all graphic-types out there - happy (belated) World Graphics Day. Hope it was a good one. For what it’s worth here’s events that were planned, though not much point in showing up - they all happened yesterday.

For designers - want the chance to have some of your work published in the upcoming Logo Lounge 4? You can, but time is running out. From the site

Entries for Book 4 are being accepted right now. All logos posted to the LogoLounge.com site are automatically entered, so members are encouraged to upload regularly. (For more information on membership, please Join Now.) Only LogoLounge members are eligible to enter. No additional fees or forms required. Entries must be posted to LogoLounge.com on or before March 31, 2007 according to the site’s specifications to qualify. (Logos submitted after this date will be collected for consideration for Book 5.)

The Logo Lounge site is a great reference tool (if you’re already a member, search for The Logo Factory for a good sampling of our material). Meanwhile, you can pick up a copy of Logo Lounge 3 over at Amazon.

Bill Gates that is. Apparently Microsoft head Gates is less than thrilled with Apple’s “I’m a PC, I’m an Apple” commercials, describing them as ‘lying’ and complaining that the boys from Cupertino are being mean to Gates’ new Vista OS. At least that’s according to this interview, published on MSNBC (not that you should expect a hard hitting interview - three guesses as to what the MS part refers to). Gates also goes on to say that he’s never seen the ‘Surgery’ version of the ads - where actor John Hodgman - more noted for his droll appearances on The Daily Show - is being prepped for ‘Surgery’ - an update to the recently released Vista. No offence to Mr. Gates, but he comes across a little on the whiny side (on the other hand, I think it’s pretty safe to say that the Apple vs. Microsoft ‘truce’ is completely over). Personally, I love the ads, and found the recent ‘Security’ version (pictured above) so hilarious, almost choked on my coffee. If you’re interested (I know you are) you can see all the ads at Apple’s web site.

At least according to Wired’s Listening Post who tell a tale of Apple Computer slapping Podcast Ready with a ‘cease and desist’ nastygram, claiming that the phrases ‘Podcast Ready’ and ‘myPodder’ infringe Apple trademarks. According to Wired, Apple has been cracking down on lots of folks for using the term ‘Pod’, even though the term has become ubiquitous for downloadable audio files and pre-recorded internet radio shows (the actual Apple trademark is for the name ‘iPod’). ZD Net has a few examples of Apple pushing its weight around and details the story of Mach 5 Products who were slapped with a similar cease and desist by the Cupertino company when they developed a product called the Profit Pod. This is a little ‘evil empire’-ish for Apple, who usually are fairly cool in their relationship with the Internet and computer communities. Mac News World has more. Apple has indeed applied to the US Trademark Office to trademark the word ‘pod’ in additon to ‘iPod’ which it already owns. The reaction towards Apple’s heavy-hand has been less than favorable.