- Messages
- 7
- Country
Hello all,
I'm building a commercial MSFS 2024 add-on: a light two-seat trainer with a touchscreen flight display modelled closely on a Garmin unit that the real aircraft has fitted. The display is written from scratch in TypeScript against the MSFS avionics SDK. No Garmin code, firmware, data or artwork is in it — the layout and symbols were measured from the publicly available Pilot's Guide and from Garmin's own PC Trainer Suite, which I run under its own licence.
Before I release it I want to get the trademark position right, and I've found plenty of opinion and very little first-hand experience. So I'm asking people who have actually shipped something:
1. Did you ask Garmin, and what happened? I know Mindstar Aviation ship a commercial G1000 add-on whose notice reads "Use of the Garmin logo is with permission from Garmin International, Inc. This software is not endorsed or approved by Garmin International, Inc." — which tells me permission is obtainable, but not how long it took, who to write to, or whether money changed hands. If you've been through it, I'd value hearing how.
2. Is nominative use enough in practice? My understanding is that I may truthfully describe a product as "a simulation of the Garmin® G500 TXi" with a visible non-endorsement disclaimer, without permission — as long as I don't name the product after their mark and don't imply endorsement. Has anyone had that position challenged?
3. The logo specifically. The real unit shows the Garmin logo on its start-up page. Reproducing it is trade dress rather than copyright, and my assumption is that it needs explicit permission and that everything else does not. Is that how others have read it?
4. Does the Working Title / Asobo situation change anything? Working Title ship Garmin-branded avionics inside MSFS under a partnership. I've assumed that grant covers them and not third-party developers, and that I can't rely on it. Is that right?
For what it's worth, the position I'm shipping with unless someone tells me otherwise: our own wordmark instead of Garmin's logo, the product named after the aircraft rather than the avionics, the Garmin name used descriptively in the store text, and a non-endorsement disclaimer in the package and on the store page. I'd rather over-comply and be told I didn't need to.
I'm aware nobody here is my lawyer and I'm not asking anyone to be one — I'm after lived experience, not legal advice.
Thanks, Sebastian
I'm building a commercial MSFS 2024 add-on: a light two-seat trainer with a touchscreen flight display modelled closely on a Garmin unit that the real aircraft has fitted. The display is written from scratch in TypeScript against the MSFS avionics SDK. No Garmin code, firmware, data or artwork is in it — the layout and symbols were measured from the publicly available Pilot's Guide and from Garmin's own PC Trainer Suite, which I run under its own licence.
Before I release it I want to get the trademark position right, and I've found plenty of opinion and very little first-hand experience. So I'm asking people who have actually shipped something:
1. Did you ask Garmin, and what happened? I know Mindstar Aviation ship a commercial G1000 add-on whose notice reads "Use of the Garmin logo is with permission from Garmin International, Inc. This software is not endorsed or approved by Garmin International, Inc." — which tells me permission is obtainable, but not how long it took, who to write to, or whether money changed hands. If you've been through it, I'd value hearing how.
2. Is nominative use enough in practice? My understanding is that I may truthfully describe a product as "a simulation of the Garmin® G500 TXi" with a visible non-endorsement disclaimer, without permission — as long as I don't name the product after their mark and don't imply endorsement. Has anyone had that position challenged?
3. The logo specifically. The real unit shows the Garmin logo on its start-up page. Reproducing it is trade dress rather than copyright, and my assumption is that it needs explicit permission and that everything else does not. Is that how others have read it?
4. Does the Working Title / Asobo situation change anything? Working Title ship Garmin-branded avionics inside MSFS under a partnership. I've assumed that grant covers them and not third-party developers, and that I can't rely on it. Is that right?
For what it's worth, the position I'm shipping with unless someone tells me otherwise: our own wordmark instead of Garmin's logo, the product named after the aircraft rather than the avionics, the Garmin name used descriptively in the store text, and a non-endorsement disclaimer in the package and on the store page. I'd rather over-comply and be told I didn't need to.
I'm aware nobody here is my lawyer and I'm not asking anyone to be one — I'm after lived experience, not legal advice.
Thanks, Sebastian
