[Dangelus]

Kodi does not provide TV channel logos as far as I'm aware so no, this is not possible.

Your missing the point entirely, Trademark infringement includes use of intellectual property without permission of the owner. These addons are using the words/logos of trademark holders without permission, which in turn confuses users into thinking these addons are made by the owner of the trademark, when infact they are not.

I suggestion you learn what trademark infringement is.

Thanks, I do

"Trademark infringement is the unauthorized use of a trademark or service mark on or in connection with goods and/or services in a manner that is likely to cause confusion, deception, or mistake about the source of the goods and/or services."

Confusion: No. "NBC Sports" add-on streams an official feed of NBC Sports.

Deception: No, I wanted to watch an official feed of NBC Sports and the add-on provides that.

Mistake about the source of the goods and/or services: No. It's an official feed of NBC Sports.


Even if people believe the creator of the add-on is the owner of the content or is endorsed in some way I don't think there is a case to be heard here since the add-on is not causing any harm to the image of the content owner.

[Big Aero]

You talk some mud. Just because this addon taps into the official streams of NBC Sports, it doesn't mean it's perfectly okay to use their trademarked words "NBC Sports Live Extra" as the name and use official trademarked logos aswel. This causes confusion to users who believe the addon was made by the trademark owner, and not some random 3rd party.

How do you know it's not causing harm - Are you some kind of NBC representive? As I said what happens if the addon goes down, then people complain to NBC about it (since it looks so official with all the trademarked words/logos). Do they really need extra unwanted workload due to people complaining about a addon which they didn't even create? Kind of similar to the amount of people who come on here asking why 1Channel or Icefilms stopped working.

[MetalChris]

So what your saying is the average user is going to take notice of the author? You mean the user is going to Google the addon authors name to see if the author is a representive of the trademarked company? No. Honestly the average user won't even look at the authors name, they will see the trademarked name/logo and assume it's official, then select install.

Pretty big presumption on your part to speak for the average user, but - even with my poor eyesight, I can see the author's name just below the add-on icon. Not sure how anyone else could miss that, but I suppose it is entirely possible, if unlikely.

Okay you say Kodi doesn't provide any content, but Kodi distributes the addons from their "official repository" - therefor Kodi does provide access (door) to content, to a certain degree. Or am I wrong and Kodi does not own the official Kodi repository?

This is the same logic the anti-gun crowd uses, and it fails here as well. Your line of thinking would also have auto manufacturers liable for speeding tickets.

This whole project is just a massive trademark/piracy/hypocrite-mess.

Sorry you feel that way. My best suggestion at this point would be to uninstall any add-ons you feel are violating someone else's trademark. That way you can at least limit your own involvement in what you feel is illegal.

[Dangelus]

You talk some mud. Just because this addon taps into the official streams of NBC Sports, it doesn't mean it's perfectly okay to use their trademarked words "NBC Sports Live Extra" as the name and use official trademarked logos aswel. This causes confusion to users who believe the addon was made by the trademark owner, and not some random 3rd party.

How do you know it's not causing harm - Are you some kind of NBC representive?

No I am not. I am using common sense and the fact that the add-on provides the service the trademark is representing.

As I said what happens if the addon goes down, then people complain to NBC about it (since it looks so official with all the trademarked words/logos). Do they really need extra unwanted workload due to people complaining about a addon which they didn't even create? Kind of similar to the amount of people who come on here asking why 1Channel or Icefilms stopped working.

Of course they won't. Again, common sense. It's a Kodi add-on. They come here, just like you said.

[jmh2002]

Simple solution (because all these piracy/trademark/whatever threads always get way out of hand):

Let's just add a small annotation to note that this is not an official addon from xyz company, etc, etc and is provided by community enthusiasts.

Some people will read it, some won't, most wont care either way because most people don't read the fine print anyway.

No need for the huge paragraphs of text here. I start to wonder if some people really are Kodi supporters or not...

[DarrenHill]

Many add-ons already carry such a disclaimer anyway.

[jmh2002]

Agreed, so job done, perhaps all that is necessary in addition is some brief note across the bottom of the icons referring to said disclaimer, and perhaps some further official policy from Kodi regarding such disclaimers for addons in the official repo.

Lets not make all these issues way more complicated than they need to be, and instead get back to enjoying our Kodi setups

[Ned Scott]

I'm sorry Dangelus, but you're pretty much dead wrong about this.

If Kodi wants people to respect their trademark, then the official Kodi add-on repository needs to respect other peoples trademark. The add-on is not official, even if the content is coming from official sources. That's no different than someone making their own YouTube app, with content coming from YouTube, and putting it on an app store. Google would be pissed, and it's happened before with that exact example.

semi-related: jesus christ, has no one replaced the icon for Unpause Jumpback? It was reported over a year ago that the current icon was taken from some company's logo. You can find generic arrow icons everywhere. It can't take more than five seconds to get a new logo.

[Ned Scott]

Lets not make all these issues way more complicated than they need to be, and instead get back to enjoying our Kodi setups

That's the attitude other people seem to have when they're asked to not use the Kodi logo in certain situations. They don't think it's an issue, or they think people should know better, etc. The only reason it hasn't become an issue is because only a very few have ever noticed, and at least one did demand that the add-on be taken down.

Preemptively fixing the problem is a very good idea and will be less work in the long run.

[Ned Scott]

Fair use? Your saying this is fair use using these trademarked words & logos?

Yes, because of non-commercial use and the fact that the add-ons provide access to content hosted by the copyright holders.

Fair use is a copyright argument. You can't use "fair use" for trademarks. Many things that are trademarked aren't even eligible for copyright, but are still fully protected by trademark law.

[jmh2002]

Yes, so I agreed that Kodi should make some pre-emptive changes, instead of losing time with huge tirade paragraphs like happens in many of these threads, arguing about the minutiae of legal interpretations. It's wasted effort.

Ultimately most of the addons here would face a take down for being against some part of the terms of service, even ones that use official apis.

So, that part can't be solved unless Kodi excludes almost all such addons. But parts regarding making a correct effort to respect trademarks and content can be, if only via a simple disclaimer, even if it won't ultimately hold up vs a take down order.

So, my point was let's not waste time arguing about the minutiae of legal interpretation here in the forums. Kodi should make policy, with legal guidance, regarding what is the best middle ground to take.

[Ned Scott]

This could be as simple as just calling an add-on something different. For example "Videos from NBC.com" instead of "NBC". That little change can make a big difference, as far as trademarks are concerned. Names and logos can be used, but how they're used is the tricky part.

[Dangelus]

I'm sorry Dangelus, but you're pretty much dead wrong about this.

If Kodi wants people to respect their trademark, then the official Kodi add-on repository needs to respect other peoples trademark. The add-on is not official, even if the content is coming from official sources. That's no different than someone making their own YouTube app, with content coming from YouTube, and putting it on an app store. Google would be pissed, and it's happened before with that exact example.

semi-related: jesus christ, has no one replaced the icon for Unpause Jumpback? It was reported over a year ago that the current icon was taken from some company's logo. You can find generic arrow icons everywhere. It can't take more than five seconds to get a new logo.

It wouldn't be the first time I don't know, there is a lot to be said for intent and these add-ons do nothing but facilitate the use of said official services...

Seriously though, this opens up a can of worms. If the Foundation agrees then there is a lot of cosmetic work that would need doing to a lot of the add-ons in the official repo. And where do we drawer the line? Logos? I mean, somewhere in the name needs to tell you what official sources the add-on is accessing. ah you've answered this before I could reply.

[jmh2002]

This could be as simple as just calling an add-on something different. For example "Videos from NBC.com" instead of "NBC". That little change can make a big difference, as far as trademarks are concerned. Names and logos can be used, but how they're used is the tricky part.

Exactly my point. No need for huge tirades of nonsense here, Only need for some common sense (perhaps backed by some legal guidance). And for Kodi to enact some further policy for the official repo.

Reading some threads here starts to make me think some people prefer to argue on the internet instead of actually doing something practical. Between that, chinese spam threads from new users (which kodi refuses to block), and idiots who can't even find the right forum or thread based on their problem, well, it all starts to get rather tiresome...

[Dangelus]

This could be as simple as just calling an add-on something different. For example "Videos from NBC.com" instead of "NBC". That little change can make a big difference, as far as trademarks are concerned. Names and logos can be used, but how they're used is the tricky part.

Exactly my point. No need for huge tirades of nonsense here, Only need for some common sense (perhaps backed by some legal guidance). And for Kodi to enact some further policy for the official repo.

Reading some threads here starts to make me think some people prefer to argue on the internet instead of actually doing something practical. Between that, chinese spam threads from new users (which kodi refuses to block), and idiots who can't even find the right forum or thread based on their problem, well, it all starts to get rather tiresome...

Well it is my hope that the intentions of the OP was to highlight a possible issue that could undermine the Foundation's ability to fight it's own trademark battles. If this is the case and the outcome is Kodi comes out of this with better legal credibility then I don't think it was a waste of time.