If these potential logos are not on a free license, as you suggest (and i
have no reason to assume you are wrong), then they should certainly not be
moved to commons. Meta seems like a correct place.
If the rules of meta can be changed so that these copyrighted images can
stay hosted there?
Perhaps a template with the contest info might be useful. One way or the
other, it would be a good thing if the copyright status could be determined:
does the foundation have all rights? Do the creators still have all rights
reserved?
teun spaans
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 8:19 PM, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 20 February 2010 19:14, Tomasz Ganicz
<polimerek(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2010/2/20 geni <geniice(a)gmail.com>om>:
> On 20 February 2010 05:54, The Cunctator <cunctator(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes. This is idiotic. The logo contest followed the same rules as all
other
submissions to Wikipedia -- they were submitted under
the GFDL.
Evidence?
--
Evidence of what? At the beginning on all Wikipedias as well as meta
there were no license templates at all. It was just assumed that all
original content is under GNU FDL - both text and pictures. The idea
of license templates for media files was created to provide
possibility to use pictures on other free licenses and those which are
public domain. Following the copyright paranoia in such the manner you
could ask if there is any evidence that articles in Wikipedia are
legally under GNU FDL / CC-BY-SA. Do we have any evidence that users
agreed for the license conditions? How many of them read the
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use ? And how many of
those who read Terms of Use followed the links to the licenses legal
code or at least general explanation of their practical consequences ?
In case of text content it is simply assumed with no evidence at all
that editors agreed. Moreover even if the uploader to Commons chooses
the license in upload form do we check if he/she knows and understand
its conditions? So, it is all assumed with no evidence at all.
Strange?
The logo contest was specificaly non standard with copyrights not
being released so that the logo copyright could be held exclusively by
the foundation. The various wikimedia logos (except the mediawiki one)
are not under a free license.
--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l