On 29/01/2008, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca> wrote:
Chris Howie wrote:
On Jan 28, 2008 12:29 PM, Elias Friedman
<elipongo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Another WP:POINT violation to prove the point? I'm really close to
supporting that.
Heck, it even makes sense to me. With this image's big red copyright
sitting there in the Commons database, one theoretically can't call a
complete image dump from Commons "free". Anyone that wanted to reuse the
image dump as a whole would have to know about these exceptions and go
through manually weeding them out. These logos should be hosted
elsewhere, and once again, Meta seems like the logical choice.
Presumably this would be troublesome for projects linking to them, but
if those projects allow "nonfree" images they could have local copies.
And if they don't allow "nonfree" images they shouldn't be using the
logos in the first place.
Better not turn up the discussion about the hallowed wikipedia logo's
copyleft status... A group only ever looks consistent from the
outside, and sometimes not even then.
Peter Ansell