Jimmy Wales jwales@bomis.com writes:
elian wrote:
Someone wanted to place the emblem (coat of arms or whatever the correct english term is) of a city to the article about it and was unsure if this is legal. In Germany there are laws about "Hoheitszeichen" like flags, emblems, which restrict the right to use them.
What kind of restrictions are there? I'm just curious.
It's forbidden to use them in misleading context, f.e. in letters for the purpose to make them appear as coming from government institutions, or to put them on products or use them in ads.
How is the legal situation? I suppose wikipedia is in the sphere of american law. If it's legal, do we have to redraw the emblems ourselves or can we take the "official" images?
It seems unlikely to me that the emblem of a city is copyright. Aren't most of them really old, at the least?
Yep. I don't think they are really copyrighted, there rather appears to be special laws about them (as above). And the problem I forgot to mention: if we include them in Wikipedia it means we are putting them under a new licence, the GFDL, which knows nothing about these restrictions (which still apply). Or do I misunderstand the concept of GFDL here? So it seems we have a conflict here.
It's possible. But some legal experts think that the Supreme Court will rule -- correctly, perhaps -- that the Constitution gives the power to set the term of copyrights to the Congress, and that the recent extensions fall well within the realm of the Congressional public policy setting functions.
http://eldred.cc/ is a good resource to learn more.
Even if the Supreme Court rules one way, it is possible for Congress to change their minds. This is somewhat unlikely because (a) the general public doesn't seem to care much and (b) the people who do care, care a lot (and contribute mightily to congressional campaigns).
Thanks for the explanations :-)
greetings, elian