--- Fredrik Josefsson fred_chessplayer@yahoo.se schrieb:
--- will@avery.homelinux.org skrev:
Quoting Fredrik Josefsson fred_chessplayer@yahoo.se:
<snip> > This is all based on some persistant users alleged > comprehension of German jurisdiction where (according > to the users) "sweat of the brow" is required to > render something copyrightable. <snip>
Just the opposite I believe. Merely having created something ("sweat of the brow") is enough in the UK, but does not suffice in Germany.
Will
You're right. This misunderstanding was pointed out to me later. "Sweat of the brow" is not applied in Germany, it is other countries such as the U.K. that make use of it.
Correct. But many logos do not get what germans call "Schöpfungshöhe" by law. There is nothing like it in other countries. So it is stupid trying to translate it even though the german article links on [[threshold of originality]] which IMHO is not the same.
I to explain with an example. I take a photograph devide it into x squares so that I can get the exact proportions on the canvas and make a raw sketch with a felt tip. Then I just fill the colors with oil paint. That is hard but dull work involving no creativaty whatsoever. Therefore no "Schöpfungshöhe" is involved. Same for scribble scatches that have their origin during a phone call with the mother in law.
The German thinking is explained in Template:Logo-Germany ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Logo-Germany ). The template was however created only a few days ago, and is now listed for deletion.
WTF! Why has it not been speedy deleted? It is commons policy not to have logos. Now we need to explain why in a deletion process? They may have discussion first and then create such a stupid template. The other way round it is totally ignoring policies that have been accepted by a brought community for years. What has happened to commons?
greetings
Paddy
___________________________________________________________ Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de