[Foundation-l] Use of Wikimedia-Logo's in articles

[Anthere]

Tuvic wrote:
>>It's probably not a violation of the GFDL, any more than Red Hat
>>putting proprietary works onto a Red Hat Linux CD violates the GPL
>>(which it doesn't).
>>
>>There also doesn't seem to be any guidance from the foundation, so
>>that leaves it up to each project to decide for itself, I suppose...
> 
> 
> Ok, that would be nice. Only a little vote and we can move on.
> 
> 
>>You've just described what we call "with permission images" that are
>>removed on sight these days.
> 
> 
> Damn, not nice any more :-( Bye-Bye, vote!
> 
> 
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Cvutan.png
>>
>>I really like this. :-)
> 
> 
> That's not quite what I had in mind when I was talking about the logo's :-)
> 
> So, it seems like nobody actually knows exactly what is allowed or what not.
> Use will probably be permitted by the Foundation (can they sue themselves
> for using it in an article?), but reuse of forking could be problematic,
> which is against Wikipedia idealogy.
> 
> Also, is it deliberate that the Board is silent, or do they just didn't
> notice this thread. (stupid question to ask: either way, I won't receive
> answer :-)).
> 
> Greeting, Tuvic


Uh, no. I noticed it.
I just have no idea what to say. The logo is copyright. Period.
It is correct that using it is "with permission", so by some standards, 
not allowed (not free content).

I have no comment to make on this, because I think it would be stupid to 
remove it as obviously the Foundation is not gonna argue, nor sue.
On the other hand, if we follow the will of our most convinced editors, 
indeed the logo should not be there.

I will propose a rule of thumb. If the logo is in an article, who may be 
published or republished by any website without us feeling unconfortable 
with, then do publish it.
If the logo use is of such type we would prevent reuse by legal means or 
ask money for the re-use, then do not put in the encyclopédia.

but well...