Sorry, but I've given up on the commons. User:Twthmoses has gone ahead and removed all references to this template in around 500 images, thereby removing the copyright and source status of all of these images on the basis that he doesn't believe it. He/she then adds an "unknown" tag to all those images because he says there is no source information, although solurce information was readily displayed. He/she also claims that even if these images were ineligible for copyright (which he/she doesn't really believe anyway), the images themselves has some strange sort of copyright. Wow! -- Egil 08:47, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Disputed tag 
Twthmoses added some text about this tag being disputed. I'm going to remove it. If someone else wants to second Twthmoses's opinion, they should feel free to re-add it. Dbenbenn 21:05, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
I have discussed the matter with Knut Johannessen at Riksarkivet and the conclusion User:Twthmoses makes are correct. That includes specifically that it is not acceptable to use these insignias for any commercial use. They (Riksarkivet) assumes that it is okey to keep the insignias in low resolution. Johannessen referred to 72dpi as maximum resolution. In addition they are not in the public domain, but they are neither copyrighted by ordinary means. They are approved by «kongen i statsråd», that is, they are noted as accepted by the regent after they are proposed by the government. The statement «the images themselves has some strange sort of copyright» seems to be right as they are not copyrighted in the usual sense.
In addition, a vectorized version of the is assumed by Johannessen to be outside acceptable use, as this will allow reproduction of the Coa for commersial use. He was very clear on this.
The phone call for this update was done after request of User:Red devil 666. A note is made at the norwegian equivalent of Village pump, Tinget/Arkiv 16#Spørsmål om korrekt lisens for norske våpen.
The template is not reverted to the previous version by User:Twthmoses, this should be done by an admin on commons. Likewise the content of the copyright should be updated, and it should be veryfied that the size and resolution of the image files are acceptable.
- JEB, we don't read norwegian. Well, maybe Nynorsk but definitely not the other one. Of course, I have reverted it to the previous version. Cary "Bastique" Bass parler voir 20:15, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- After seeing JEB's post on no:, I remembered reading something about copyright and municipal coats of arms, and found a reference in the newsletter (# 1/2001) of BONO (Norwegian Visual Artists Copyright Society). The story relates that Hammerfest municipality had to alter their coa. The municipality had altered it several times, without consulting the heirs of the artist Ole Valle (who died less than 70 years ago). In 1996, BONO demanded that it had to be altered back to its original state, and that any changes must be approved by said heirs. In 2001, this was accepted by the municipality after a lenghty process.  The case did not go to court, and I can find no example of similar cases being tried in the justice system, but since the municipality fought it for several years and then gave in (with considerable loss of prestige and a considerable cost for reprinting all their letterheads, information materials etc.) it seems that it was accepted that municipal coats of arms are protected by Norwegian copyright law.
- I can find no reference to any special form of copyright status for such arms; they do have a special protection against misuse (Norwegian Penal Code § 328 nr 4, against posing as a government official through the use of official symbols) but there is no mention of a special status in copyright law or in the penal code. Reading through the discussions here, I can see no reference to such a status other than the claims that "it is so". Many of them are clearly not protected due to age, but a lot of municipalities have arms from the second half of the 20th century. We asked for legal advice concerning this on no:, and it was made clear that for purposes of information, they could be freely used, but based on that advice our template says that they may be copyrighted. The royal approval is quite irrelevant to the question of copyright; it confirms that a design is an official symbol and therefore protected against misuse, but says nothing about copyright.
- I could be wrong, but seeing that BONO has already used considerable resources to protect a municipal coat of arms, I believe that those who have made claims of a special copyright status need to back those claims up with references; otherwise, the ones that are still protected need to be removed from Commons – preferably after a grace period to allow transfer to individual projects, as they can legally be displayed on all our projects; it's a question of whether or not they fall within the rules here at Commons. Cnyborg 01:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- If the Norwegian Riksarkivet are aware of the heraldic laws, they ought to know that heraldic shields are drawn according to a w:blazon, which in itself is not subject to copyright. There does exist an artistical copyright of images but this is independant of the blazon. / Fred Chess 09:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
We need clarification 
Perhaps it would be best to list this template for deletion. Then more people would give inputs to the current impasse. __meco 03:03, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- The issue has now been brought before Tinget on the Norwegian Wikipedia as well as Tinget here on Commons. __meco 20:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Categorization Category:Coats of arms of Norway 
The autocategorization is a mess. Category:Coats of arms of Norway contains all files and many files are also in the appropriate subcategories. Also Category:Coats of arms of Norway is a subcat of Category:Public domain althoug it may contain other files (texts related to coas from norway, dont know).
I will break up the autocategorization. All images without a subcategory will have Category:Coats of arms of Norway added by hand in the first step. Then the template will categorize into an appropriate, separated, hidden license category Category:PD Coa Norway and the images are manually collected in the symbols of norway content category tree. --Martin H. (talk) 04:35, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- And Done, only a few files, see my edits and please check this files and add them to better subcategories. We now have a content category(tree) Category:Coats of arms of Norway like every other country and a plain license category Category:PD Coa Norway. --Martin H. (talk) 04:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)