[Foundation-l] New Meta-Wiki logo - Approved?

[David Levy]

Samuel Klein wrote:

> I can't see any reason why project logos cannot be PD, and personally
> love the idea of massively collaborative projects having PD logos --
> that makes sense to me.

My understanding is that the Foundation doesn't (or didn't, at least)
want anyone to be able to use its projects' logos for purposes other
than identification of said projects.

As I noted, the image in question can be legally used by anyone for
any purpose without any conditions.  If Conservapedia wants to use it
as their logo (provided that they make no claims of affiliation with
Wikimedia), they can.  If a company wants to use it as a logo for
their bottled water, laundry detergent, or insecticide (random
examples), they can.  If a brothel wants to hang it over its door, it
can.  If the KKK wants to use it to promote hate speech, it can.

> I also did not recall that the wikiversity logo was replaced simply
> because it was available under a free license -- do you have a link
> to that discussion?  I thought other issues dominated.

I'm going from memory, but I recall that while the change was under
discussion for other reasons, it was fast-tracked because of the
urgency to replace the free image.  In fact, the new logo was
introduced before we were even certain that we could retain the blue
color.  (At the time, Elian from the public relations department had
said that they were reluctant to allow the adoption of any more
predominantly blue project logos.)