[Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia logos on Commons

[Brian McNeil]

I think Mike has the right idea, but there is one issue I want to bring
up...

A lot of projects will do an ad-hoc derivative logo (Eg on Wikinews we did
an "ongoing story" one). How easy is it going to be to put these logos into
the right place?


Brian.

-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Casey Brown
Sent: 25 August 2007 22:33
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia logos on Commons

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mike Godwin <mgodwin at wikimedia.org>
Date: Aug 25, 2007 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia logos on Commons
To: Casey Brown <cbrown1023.ml at gmail.com>
Cc: Kat Walsh <mindspillage at gmail.com>



I should add that I'm all for making the logos available from some central
location for WMF and chapters to use.  I just don't think they should be
lumped together with Commons -- that's a recipe for misunderstanding.



--m





 On Aug 25, 2007, at 11:03 AM, Casey Brown wrote:

 Some guy nommed all the WMF logos on Commons for deletion because they were
"not free" (Commons only accepts freely-licensed images).  You can see the
full convo in the Foundation-l archvies.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Casey Brown <cbrown1023.ml at gmail.com>
Date: Aug 25, 2007 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia logos on Commons
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>

Has anyone asked Mike's opinion on the discussion?  Last I checked he was
working on trademarks (and probably logos too).  I'm sure he'd find this
somewhat interesting.

On 8/25/07, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
>
> Brian wrote:
> > I think Erik really got to the heart of the issue. If this _were_ an
> issue,
> > it boils down to the fact that you need to have legal protection of
> certain
> > digital media that is somewhat stricter than your philosophy usually
> > permits, and finding a way to tackle that problem in all open source
> > projects is the place to do this, perhaps with a new type of license.
> >
>
> Well, the way the Debian project solved this is by [gasp!] just freely
> licensing their logo, as far as copyright goes, but retaining a
> trademark that they can use to prohibit misleading uses.
>
> (They do also have a "this logo is for official Debian use only" logo,
> but it's not the common one that is usually associated with the project.)
>
> See: http://www.debian.org/logos/
>
> IMO this is a much better way of handling it without inviting obvious
> discussions about consistency.
>
> -Mark
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



-- 
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note:  This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.  Personal emails sent
to
this address will probably get lost.

-- 
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note:  This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.  Personal emails sent
to
this address will probably get lost.





-- 
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note:  This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.  Personal emails sent
to
this address will probably get lost.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l