From: Jimmy Wales jwales@bomis.com Subject: [WikiEN-l] Some images need to be deleted...
This makes me wonder again about the use of corporate logos (see http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Johnson%27s , and of course http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logotype )
I tried to formulate a policy, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: Logos , but the discussion was disappointingly sparse. From the input of others, notably JamesDay, I got the impression that people were pretty sure that corporate logos were fair use, and that it was OK to include them together with a notice explaining that they were (almost certainly) trademarks and not GFDL.
(What controversy there was seemed to be between those who felt that the use of logos was intrinsically promotional and POV, and those (like myself) who thought that it was analogous to including a photo of a living person in an article about that person--intrinsically promotional, but appropriate and encyclopedic).
Should corporate logos be banned on the basis of licensing issues?
I think the use of corporate logos is perfectly fine, given the exact caveats that you've stated about identifying them as trademarks. I think that the argument that including them is "intrinsically promotional and POV" isn't remotely convincing.
--Jimbo
On 02/18/04 16:27, dpbsmith@verizon.net wrote:
Should corporate logos be banned on the basis of licensing issues?
See [[London underground]] - they protect that logo vigorously, but they wouldn't have a great deal of success suing for a photo of a sign as a trademark violation.
- d.