Commons talk:Licensing

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Important discussion pages (index)
Gnome User Speech.svg


This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Licensing.

For discussions of specific copyright questions, please go to Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Discussions that do not relate to changes to the page Commons:Licensing may be moved, with participants notified with the template {{subst:moved to VPC|Commons talk:Licensing}}.

For old discussions, see the Archives. Recent sections with no replies for 14 days may be archived.


Archived discussions[edit]

Seven 2006/2007 discussions organized as subpages, ignoringincl. comments added in 2014:

Template protection after review[edit]

There are many country specific copyright templates on commons that need review and should be protected thereafter. Many images on commons use these templates and changing something in the template like accidentally adding a hot cat category would affect all of these and would require mass purging for all images. We should have a review department reviewing each available template and after discussion protecting it. We should discuss the layout of PD templates: Should they include why they are PD in the USA or should this be handled in another template like {{PD-Egypt}} and {{PD-Egypt-1996}}. With the URAA laws the copyright laws of a country doesn't mean that much without an explanation on why they are PD in USA. Something like {{PD-China}} doesn't work for commons because it doesn't specify why it's PD USA. And should there be templates for country specific templates for each case like found in Category:Egypt-related tags? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Diaa abdelmoneim (talk • contribs) 14:06, 2009 April 23 (UTC)

Copyrights on vector images of "simple designs"[edit]

Under the "Simple design" section, it is mentioned that simple designs (i.e. logos) which are either too simple for copyright or old enough that the copyright has expired are accepted on Commons even if the design is trademarked. This makes sense. An issue worth considering, however, is whether a vector image file (i.e. EPS or SVG) of an uncopyrighted design can have its own copyright with regard to the vector data. In particular, sites such as seeklogo.com carry vector images of logos that almost certainly include logos in the {{PD-textlogo}} category. For these, there is the question as to whether converting an EPS from seeklogo.com to SVG would implicate copyright on the original EPS file. There is also the issue wherein vector images of fonts can be copyrighted in circumstances where a raster rendering would not (from what one understands); some of the info on the talk page for {{PD-textlogo}} may also be relevant. From what one can tell, it may be that there is no one clear answer that covers every situation and it may depend on the specific markup of a vector file and/or the specific design represented by the vector file data. Along these lines, one possibility to consider is adding something like the following to the "Simple designs" section before the "Fonts" subsection:

Raster renderings (i.e. PNG images) of uncopyrighted simple designs can themselves be regarded as being uncopyrighted. For vector images (i.e. SVG files) of uncopyrighted simple designs, the question as to whether the vector representation has its own copyright is less clear; see the English Wikipedia copyright information about fonts and the {{PD-textlogo}} talk page for more information.

--Gazebo (talk) 04:38, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Any thoughts...can the above wording be improved?-it would seem useful to address the issue somehow. --Gazebo (talk) 09:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)