[Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos
cunctator at gmail.com
Tue Mar 30 00:36:00 UTC 2010
No, this is a profoundly stupid decision that has no logical sense. A "free"
license is a copyright license.
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Marcus Buck <me at marcusbuck.org> wrote:
> The Swedish Wikipedia decision is consequent and logical. Logos are
> copyrighted. Copyrighted material cannot be included. So no logos. It's
> plain and simple. The problem is not the reasonable decision of the
> Swedish Wikipedia, but the unreasonable decision of the Foundation to
> claim copyright for the logos. The foundation did that because they
> thought that would make it easier to defend the brand. But that's just
> intermingling trademarks and copyright. Trademark protection does
> everything we need. No need for additional copyright protection. The
> Coca Cola logo is PD-old (and in many jurisdictions also PD-ineligible)
> and they have no problem defending their brand. Why should Wikimedia
> logos be any different?
> Just release the logos under a free license and the problem will be gone.
> Marcus Buck
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
More information about the foundation-l