2009/6/4 Robert Rohde <rarohde(a)gmail.com>om>: This has been proposed more than once and rejected. If our mailing list archives were searchable in Google I'd track down what the rationales for the rejections were ... does anyone remember off the top of their heads? - d.

Some time ago, I suggested using Meta for this purpose. That would be the best solution; the second-best being to use Commons and expanding the scope to chapter logos and the like (as I suggested already: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Fi…) Either would be acceptable. The status quo is not. -Mike On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 11:16 -0700, Robert Rohde wrote:

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Cary Bass <cary(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: once you start thinking on "possible liabilities" you're walking the fair use lane on commons. Commons is by definition a free content file repo. That's akin to saying "let's host some nonfree articles copied from wikipedia if we can determine we won't get in trouble"

2009/6/5 David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>om>: Zee problem kicks in with defineing chapeter images. Meetup pic for example. In practice is is probably something better dealt with through the foundation chapter agreement but it involves elements that commons doesn't really have control over. -- geni

Hello, This is maybe a kind of other point of view. I believe that the mission for the chaptors is to support free media.. But with keeping logo's protected under all right reserved that aren't giving a good example. I can understand that the official Wikimedia logos aren't free. But a logo for pikiwiki for example can easy be released under cc-by or cc-by-sa and that would also give a example for other company's how they should license there logo's and photo's. cc license can be used on Commons without problems.. But how can a organisation support free media and upload there own material under a non free license.. Huib Http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/user:Abigor msn: Abigor(a)forgotten-beauty.com

Hello, This is maybe a kind of other point of view. I believe that the mission for the chaptors is to support free media.. But with keeping logo's protected under all right reserved that aren't giving a good example. I can understand that the official Wikimedia logos aren't free. But a logo for pikiwiki for example can easy be released under cc-by or cc-by-sa and that would also give a example for other company's how they should license there logo's and photo's. cc license can be used on Commons without problems.. But how can a organisation support free media and upload there own material under a non free license.. Huib Http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/user:Abigor msn: Abigor(a)forgotten-beauty.com

No actually, I meant what I said. What I said was "keeping all rights reserved" on our logo's or other material seems a bit odd with our mission. Trademarks is another restriction on uses, and this we should not abandon. But I was speaking about copyright Huib Http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/user:Abigor msn: Abigor(a)forgotten-beauty.com

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Ting Chen<wing.philopp(a)gmx.de> wrote: The Apache Foundation logo is a registered trademark AND licensed under the Apache license. A number of very old companies hold trademarks on logos that have passed into the public domain under copyright law due to age (Coca-Cola for example). Other companies hold trademarks that are ineligible for copyright to begin with due to lack of creativity. Commons has a very large collection of such marks [1]. It is entirely possible to vigorously defend a trademark against confusion in the marketplace (e.g. the traditional domain of trademark law) while also relaxing copyright restrictions to create an authorized use regime. For example, creating guidelines on when Wikimedians are allowed to use WMF logos inside and outside the projects would be a start. The fact that all our logos remain "all rights reserved" is very unbecoming for a Foundation committed to free content creation and dissemination. -Robert Rohde [1] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Company_logos

Hello, This is maybe a kind of other point of view. I believe that the mission for the chaptors is to support free media.. But with keeping logo's protected under all right reserved that aren't giving a good example. I can understand that the official Wikimedia logos aren't free. But a logo for pikiwiki for example can easy be released under cc-by or cc-by-sa and that would also give a example for other company's how they should license there logo's and photo's. cc license can be used on Commons without problems.. But how can a organisation support free media and upload there own material under a non free license.. Huib Http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/user:Abigor msn: Abigor(a)forgotten-beauty.com

David Gerard schreef: Hello, I think there need to change a few things, and that will not be the most easy job since Commons is a big ship and can just make a 180 degrees turn without having to deal with problems, discussions or other drama. A big thing that need to be changed is communication to new projects, there is a lot of info about the policies om Commons. The only real problem is that we don't have a page that gives info to projects, A great improvement could be a help page with some content that could help projects dealing with our policies. That page could give information about: ; How Commons wants there source information. ; What the best way is to deal with permission and some info about our OTRS system. ; Information how to find info about FAQ ; And a talk page where the can ask questions. A other way to go is making the new projects ask "permission" before the start with uploading on Commons, by asking permission I mean that the make a announcement about how the gonna deal with permissions, source info and who we can contact when we (Commons) needs help. This would give the Commons also a change to ask questions about the project and give tips about the best way to go. A great problem that I noticed is language, However English is the main language on Commons it could still cause trouble. We need to remember that not every body can speak English very well or even the can not understand it at all. Now there are babel templates but we can not expect from new users that the know how to use babel templates, It could be a option to make some list with trusted user that can help in there Native language. I don't really have noticed problems with chapters and Commons. The one problem that is happening now can be solved easily but it is a big change also. We could update the Commons Licensing policy and make it possible for chapters to uploaded copyrighted material, However I still believe that Chapters are created with the mission to support free media and need to protect with copyright only when its really really needed. I have a lot more of ideas but I think it is kind of Off-topic in this thread Huib