Template talk:Vector-Images.com/Archive

Permission

I contacted Vector-Images.com and here's the answer of using raster images from their website. --TarmoK 15:45, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Vector-Images.com is affiliated with CivicHeraldry.com / Geraldika.ru (see also http://vector-images.com/about.php).

You may use our raster pictures in Wickipedia projects with quote to Vector-Images.com.

The pictures may be copied to another sites but only with quoting to Vector-Images.com

--
Best regards,
Yuri Rosich
 Vector-Images.com
 support@vector-images.com

Full correspondence

Note: link: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:TarmoK/var is now this template

to vector-images.com Monday, September 5, 2005

Dear sir/madam,

As Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, contributor I have found through it
your site and enjoyed the great quality of your work.

I'd like to ask your permission to license the use of raster images of
Vector-Images.com (GIF-files of flags and coat of arms in your site) in
Wikimedia projects.

As you have stated in "About"-page (http://vector-images.com/about.php):

   Raster images (in GIF format) of Vector-Images.com can be
   freely used on other web sites for NON-commercional purposes
   only and with quote to Vector-Images.com (hyperlink to
   http://vector-images.com) only.

..you allow it for non-commercial purposes. For using images in
Wikimedia projects is required by Wikimedia that files are free to use
also for commercial proposes. But it is ok to licence images with
Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License, which requires that
creator/source is stated and work is distributed with same rights, i.e.
Free.

Would you be so kind and give permission to use these raster images from
your website in Wikimedia projects by the licence mentioned above?
  Images from your site can be marked with notices about the source,
link to your site and license information. Images are generally stored
in Wikimedia Commons project (aside of language specific Wikipedias) and
there is for example similar usage of European Union images, see for
example: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Europe.jpg .

I have made similar example notice for Vector-Images.com, as EU images
have, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:TarmoK/var This way
your images are clearly marked to belong to you and they work also as
small advertisements to you


Thank you for your time and I hope to hear positive news from you.


Additional links:
* http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/
    Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 license
* http://wikimediafoundation.org/
    Wikimedia Foundation, Parent organisation of all Wikipedia,
Wiktionary, Wikimedia Commons etc. projects
* http://commons.wikimedia.org
    Wikimedia Commons, repository of images and other files which can be
used in all Wikimedia projects

from vector-images.com Monday, September 5, 2005

You may use our raster pictures in Wickipedia projects with quote to Vector-Images.com.

Should you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact us.

--
Best regards,
Yuri Rosich
 Vector-Images.com
 support@vector-images.com

to vector-images.com Monday, September 5, 2005

Thank you for your quick reply and permission.

I'd like to confirm one detail clearly so that we are sure that we understand
same way:
 Your permission gives also right to use these GIF-images for COMMERICAL
purposes, AS LONG the source, i.e. Vector-Images.com, is quoted. This means
that these images (along with reference to vector-images.com) may be copied
to other sites (even outside Wikipedia projects) etc. as these are taken as
free to reproduce.

And the example "stamp" I made
( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:TarmoK/var ) has correct
requirements, wording wise, for marking your images?

from vector-images.com Monday, September 5, 2005

The pictures may be copied to another sites but only with quoting to
Vector-Images.com

Best regards,
-----------------------
Yuri Rosich
Vector-Images.com support
http://vector-images.com
support@vector-images.com

Discussion from Village Pump

Template:PD-RU-exempt states that it is PD, but when taken from www.geraldika.ru (e.g. Image:Nalchik-gerb.png) the website states that При перепечатке материалов ссылка на Геральдику.ру обязательна. (reference (link) to website is obligated when using (reprinting) materials from this website). Is this also part of the normal PD licence and is this reference taken care of when quoting it as source, like is done in the Nalchik image? Or do images of geraldika not fall under the PD-RU-exempt licence or can geraldika not demand this? Just curious.--Hardscarf 20:47, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, we do have to provide a source for the images, so I personally think that we can both use the template and the link with no issues. So whatever the image uses now, it is fine. Zscout370 (sound off) 21:05, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that {{PD-RU-exempt}} could be applied to geraldika.ru (and to images which uses {{Vector-Images.com}} too).

1. PD-RU-exempt tells about state symbols, not municipal ones. Of course this could be interpreted as state symbols includes municipal.
2. As from my correspondence with geraldica.ru, they claimed that this is artists works not official COAs. At least they sell vector versions (it's not PD), bitmap versions generated from unfree images. So I assumed fair use is best tag for these images.

So I see best solution to explicitly request geraldica.ru/vector-images.com to license bitmap versions under Creative Commons Attribution license => all copyrights doubts will be erased.

EugeneZelenko 01:01, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Looks like a good idea to me. Will you ask them about it (and give them a clear indication what this licence means, so they will be more likely to say yes) as you already contacted them?--Hardscarf 19:50, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I had contacted them in 2004, but I'll write them e-mail with this proposition tomorrow. --EugeneZelenko 03:32, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Here is the text of letter (on Russian):

From: Eugene Zelenko <eugene dot zelenko at gmail dot com>
To: support at geraldika dot ru, support at vector-images dot com
Date: Oct 23, 2005 8:26 AM
Subject: Условия использования растровых изображений (geraldika.ru, vector-images.com)

Здравствуйте!

Мне бы хотелось уточнить условия использования растровых изображений,
размещённых на серверах geraldika.ru и vector-images.com.

Охраняются ли эти изображения законом Российской Федерации об
авторском праве и смежных правах (то есть, являются авторскими)?

Если они охраняются законом об авторских правах, то можно ли было
распространять их согласно условиям лицензии Creative Commons
Attribution license, тем самым выполняя условие geraldika.ru «При
перепечатке материалов ссылка на Геральдику.ру обязательна.»?

Creative Commons Attribution license разрешает свободное
распространение исходного изображения, любых его изменений и их
использование в любых целях, включая коммерческие, при условии, что
указывается ссылка на источник исходного изображения.

Подробную информацию про эту и другие лицензии Creative Commons можно
найти на http://creativecommons.org.

В любом случае хотелось бы увидеть чётко написанные условия
использования растровых изображений в
http://vector-images.com/terms.php (например, «согласно Creative
Commons Attribution license» или «только согласно статьи 19 закона
Российской Федерации об авторском праве и смежных правах» или «только
в некоммерческих целях», и так далее).

С уважением,
Евгений, администратор Wikimedia Commons.
http://commons.wikimedia.org

EugeneZelenko 15:32, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

As EugeneZelenko asked me to participate in this conversation I add my comments/thoughts.

First, in my opinion (without real knowledge of inteprateting laws) PD in terms of COA-s and flags means that everybody is free to draw one and sell it or give away, whatever. PD will not extend to this drawing itself as this is the work of creator, PD is only for the image (details, colors, layout etc.). Compare this to company logo, e.g. Nike's logo which is not free even to draw, well on can do it for herself/himself but can't present it anywhere, neither give it forward, not talking about selling the work where the logo is shown as logo itself.

So now getting to geraldika.ru, I think that they have right to copyright their work, i.e. the files in their server(s). So if somebody want's to use it, s/he should have permission. geraldika.ru accepts to use raster images (GIFs) for non-commercial use (see). For Commons this isn't enough and so I asked permission for them to use and their answer was yes as long they are mentioned. see [Template talk:Vector-Images.com] ... now the question is, is their answers there are enough to state these pictures suitable to Commons. in my opinion they are --TarmoK 16:35, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I think they should update their policies, because it's not correct situation when Wikimedia have permission to use images for any purpose, when people who takes images directly from vector-images.com have non-commercial limitation. It's legal loophole, which should be fixed. --EugeneZelenko 17:17, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Reply from vector-images.com:

From: Vector-Images.com <support at vector-images dot com>	
Reply-To: "Vector-Images.com" <support at vector-images dot com>
To: Eugene Zelenko <eugene.zelenko at gmail dot com>
Date: Oct 23, 2005 11:52 PM
Здравствуйте,

Растровые картинки гербов и флагов с наших сайтов могут быть использованы в рамках
указанной вами лицензии при условии указании гиперссылки на источник
(т.е. на www.geraldika.ru , www.vector-images.com или
www.civicheraldry.com )

Изображения негеральдического характера (различный тематический
клипарт) под такую лицензию не подпадают.

Best regards,
-----------------------
Yuri Rosich
Vector-Images.com support
http://vector-images.com
support at vector-images dot com

They agree that bitmap images of flags and COAs could be used under CC-BY (with hyperlink to www.geraldika.ru , www.vector-images.com or www.civicheraldry.com). Unfortunately their policies still not updated and I insisted to do so:

From: Eugene Zelenko <eugene.zelenko at gmail dot com>
To: "Vector-Images.com" <support at vector-images dot com>
Date: Oct 24, 2005 7:06 AM
Здравствуйте!

Большое спасибо за ответ и за согласие лицензировать Ваши изображения
под свободной лицензией!

Пожалуйста, обновите правила использования на www.geraldika.ru ,
www.vector-images.com и www.civicheraldry.com с учетом этого
разрешения, потому что в настоящем варианте, например,
http://vector-images.com/about.php ("NON-commercional") и
http://vector-images.com/about.php?lang=rus ("НЕКОММЕРЧЕСКИХ и
НЕПОЛИТИЧЕСКИХ") противоречат этому разрешению.

Хотелось бы исправить эту неоднозначность.

С уважением,
Евгений.

EugeneZelenko 14:15, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Vector-images.com had updated policies on http://vector-images.com/about.php and http://vector-images.com/about.php?lang=rus and removed any limitations axcept hyperlink to Vector-images.com. However Creative Commons Attribution license is not mentioned there.

I think correct description of their images must contains {{Vector-Images.com}}.

I think good idea to move this discussion to Template talk:Vector-Images.com.

EugeneZelenko 02:45, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I think it is better to have a separate template for geraldika.ru, with similar text as for Vector-Images.com. Or it is the same company? In fact I'm sure that they don't create many of their coats of arms and flags by themself, but just copy them from other sites. Just compare for example: [1] and Image:Tomsk_city_coat_of_arms.png. MaxiMaxiMax 08:54, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Vector-Images.com and geraldika.ru published by same company. But, I think it's safe to take images into Commons only from Vector-Images.com. Sure, geraldika.ru includes other (from not always credited sources) images, some of them resemble scans from 1980s Наука и жизнь magazine. --EugeneZelenko 15:28, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Comercial

Is allowed or not the comercial usage of images from this source?--5-5-5 00:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Commercial usage of bitmap images is allowed now. See http://vector-images.com/about.php. --EugeneZelenko 15:53, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

They say only about web sites, but prohibit usge in printed/other form.--213.141.159.52 12:30, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Converting to vector?

I'd like to convert this site's images into a vector format (myself, without purchasing their vector graphics). Is this permitted by their license? Any license permitted by Commons should permit modification, but I'm unsure since their specifically say "raster versions". Deco 09:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Depends on what you mean by "convert". ¦ Reisio 09:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I mean create a new vector graphics image based directly on the PNG image. Deco 00:14, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Considering that we demand that all derivative works are allowed for an image to be considered free enough for Commons even a trace of the raster version should be ok as long as the original iamge is credited/Lokal_Profil 15:52, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that Vector-Images.com's terms of use is vague enough to suggest that such a SVG conversion would be in violation of it. --Iamunknown 01:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Either it's allowed and everything is fine or it's not allowed and hence a restriction to which derivative works are allowed and thus not a free license per the definition of Free Cultural Works and thus not allowed on Commons. /Lokal_Profil 15:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

And incidentally, in this case, it does not appear to be allowed and does not appear to be free. Your oversimplification doesn't help. Contacting vector-images.com would help! (See below.) --Iamunknown 09:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC) My comment sounded nasty. I apologize. But please do help in the below discussion (possibly by contacting vector-images.com). --Iamunknown 06:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I mean create a new vector graphics image based directly on the PNG image

In some case you can, in others not. For example there is next case, when you can - The official symbols from Russia, Ukraine and some other countries are not subject of copyright and free. Therefore VI.com cann't appply copyright protection to raster images of such symbols, they can apply it only for their vector version of symbols. If somebody himself will make vector image, it will be new works and he can copyright it or make it PD, GFDL, etc. Alex Spade 16:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is about derivative works from Vector-Images.com images. Doing image from scratch or from official image is fine. --EugeneZelenko 14:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

What is about cases, when there is no special difference between VI.com and other official sources? Alex Spade 15:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Latest changes

What is going on here? We asked permission to use only bitmap images from their site. Their vector images are still copyrighted and conditions to use them is irrelevant for this template. Please don't mix bitmap and vector cases. --EugeneZelenko 14:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Their terms of use is for GIF format images, too: "Raster images (in GIF format) of Vector-Images.com can be easily used on other web sites with quote to Vector-Images.com (hyperlink to http://vector-images.com) only. Please read also our Terms of use." (emphasized by me) [2] --Rtc 15:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Raster images (in GIF format) of Vector-Images.com can be easily used on other web sites with quote to Vector-Images.com (hyperlink to http://vector-images.com) only. Further terms of use is for vector versions only. --EugeneZelenko 15:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

No, I asked the guy on chat:

me: It says on http://vector-images.com/about.php that "Raster images (in GIF format) of Vector-Images.com can be easily used on other web sites with quote to Vector-Images.com (hyperlink to http://vector-images.com) only. Please read also our Terms of use." -- does this mean terms of use must be obeyed for GIF images, too, or does it mean that GIF images may be used for any commercial and derivative work, even contrary to terms of use, and terms of use is only for vector versions?

he: Raster images (in GIF format) of Vector-Images.com can be easily used on other web sites with quote to Vector-Images.com

me: must terms of use be obeyed for GIF images?

he: no, the terms of use are equal for vector and raster images that means you can place our preview GIF image on your web site with quoting, but you may not resell the images in raster format.

he: yeah, obeyed )

--Rtc 15:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

He corrected himself: "I was corrected here in office. Regarding the raster images of flags and coats of arms - these raster preview pictures (in GIF format) are not obeyed the Terms of use. All other clipart pictures are obeyed. For the flags and coat of arms the Terms of use are actual regarding vector images only." --Rtc 15:57, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

As far as I remember I asked permissions only to COA and flag images. May be we need to change text next way This is a copyrighted image of flag or coat of arms from the Vector-Images.com web site for avoiding possible abuses. --EugeneZelenko 16:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

He added "probably we will correct the license regarding the raster civic heraldic pictures" and "please note that all I have said here is not the official opinion of our company, it is my opinion as customer service manager only." --Rtc 16:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Altering image

I'd like to create a version of one of these images with a transparent background. Would I be OK to upload this to commons, or would this be a violation of the license? The terms of use on the site say: 'You may modify and publish all images as you wish...' but I think this only explicitly applies to the purchasable images. --Bwmodular 08:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I've sent them a mail, so we'll see what they say... --Bwmodular 08:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

You could modify such images, but you should mention original file and use this template. However more of these images need fixing transparent color used instead of white. --EugeneZelenko 14:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, here's the first: Image:Coat_of_Indonesia_transparent.png --Bwmodular 09:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'm totally lost from the discussions above...when this image is used, each time that is, does it have to carry the reference to the source? The reason I'm wondering is I'd like to resize it to 35px to use it for a stub template {{BritishColumbia-gov-stub}}, which I haven't created yet but would be used on all non-politics-related government pages, e.g. ministries, crown corps, government agencies etc. If a ref to the source has to be made with each usage, this is unworkable on stub-template-scale images. This will sign with an IP address but I'm user [3] on regular English Wikipedia; please leave a repy on my talk page if anyone can answer this. Thx.24.80.118.71 04:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I think reference to source in image description is enough, as in case with any other images for example licensed under CC-BY. --EugeneZelenko 16:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

An update?

I was asked to begin looking at deleting these. They are still non-free. The last discussion I can find on this suggested that someone was going to make an attempt to fix the licensing on them. Looking at the site I really wonder if the site operators are actually above board with respect to copyright... if we also factor in that we'd really rather have vector versions of these images, I'm wondering if putting these up for deletion won't ultimately improve our project even if the site fixes the license issue.--Gmaxwell 01:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I e-mailed them, but I didn't received answer. However initial communications (see, e-mails on this page) were about using images in any media for any purpose. We could also try to find out older versions of http://vector-images.com/about.php and http://vector-images.com/about.php?lang=rus.

I don't think that we have all images in SVG.

EugeneZelenko 16:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

• It seems to me their current terms of service at http://vector-images.com/terms.php is incompatible with ours. Further, the various communications with them (minus the Russian that I can not read) does not ask the right questions. We shouldn't be asking if we can use them in X, Y and Z. We should be asking them to release their materials under CC-by or a GFDL license (at least). Their position seems indeterminate at this point with respect to us. Until such time as we can clarify this, I think we should deprecate the use of this tag and suspend additional uploads under it. Existing images...let them hang around for a bit, but if we can't clarify this they should be deleted. --Durin 13:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

  It does look to me as if there is as yet no free license for these images. I'll update the corresponding template on English Wikipedia to reflect this doubt. There are only about 35 such tagged images there. --Tony Sidaway 14:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

The only reason why we can host them, as I read on their about page, is that it says Raster preview images in GIF format of Vector-Images.com can be free used on other web sites with quote to Vector-Images.com (hyperlink to http://vector-images.com) only. It appears to me that vector-images has never intended to allow the previews to be used commercially, so they basically allow non-commercial citations. Eugene emailed their support; possibly the support was not clear on what we asked.

Durin: deprecation of the template seems reasonable, but please wait until everyone has had their say.

Fred Chess 07:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

It'll be great if somebody else will try to e-mail Vector-Images.com too. Thank you.

My last e-mail (unanswered):

Здравствуйте!

На Commons (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Licensing#Template:Vector-Images.com)
снова возник об условиях использования растровых изображений.

Можно ли было бы расширить разрешение использовать растровые
изображения с указанием источника (http://vector-images.com/about.php,
http://vector-images.com/about.php?lang=rus) на любые носители (в том
числе печатные), а не только сайты?

С уважением,
Евгений.

EugeneZelenko 14:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I've made a last attempt. Let's wait a little. --Panther 07:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

WOW! I've got an answer. They did it!

Здравствуйте,

Формулировка изменена на следующую:
Растровые изображения Vector-Images.com, предназначенные для
предпросмотра, могут быть использованы на других сайтах или любых
других носителях информации в любых целях только при указании
сылки на источник (т.е. на www.vector-images.com).  

В английском варианте:
Raster preview images in GIF or PNG format of Vector-Images.com can be
free used on other web sites or any other media for any purposes with
quote to
Vector-Images.com (link to http://vector-images.com) only.

Этот дисклаймер изначально быд предназначен именно для регулирования
только вопросов с превьюшными растровыми файлами, использование
которых
реально мы никогда не ограничивали. Т.к. наш бизнес заключается только
в распространении векторных клипартов, то никаких ограничений на
использование растровых файлов превью мы вообще не накладываем кроме
требования указания на источник. Т.е. по сути это свободная лицензия.

У вас в темплейте есть случай с гербом Дублина. Хотел бы уточнить
позицию по данному вопросу. Территориальные и ведомственые гербы per
se не являются объектом авторских прав, что не относится к конкретным
изображениям этих гербов. Не являются объектом авторских прав рисунки
(как бы "эталоны", хотя в геральдике нет и не может быть эталонов по
сути), приложенные к соответствующим законодательным актам - вот
использование сканов таких рисунков никак и никем не может быть
ограничено. Это же относится и к сканам рисунков, опубликованных до
1918 г. или ставших общественным достоянием к настоящему времени в
соответствии с законодательством. Наши изображения всегда имеют в
основе векторный файл, созданный на основе различных источников
(законы, рисунки исторических гербов и т.д. и пр.). В результате
векторный файл всегда отличается от оригинала, соответственно
полученный превью-рисунок - это наша стилизация данного конкретного
герба, даже если она свиду по чьему-либо мнению неотличима от
изначального исходника. Вариант один в один тут невозможен физически,
т.к. каждый герб перерисовывается вручную. Поэтому обратите внимание,
что изображения на нашем сайте не являюся сканами или фотографиями
чего-либо в принципе.

Пожалуйста, обратите внимание, что это не относится к рисункам на
Геральдике.ру - там могут быть как те же рисунки что и на
Vector-Images.com, так и рисунки из других источников (в последнем
случае источник обычно указывается на соответствующих страницах
сайта).

Надеюсь, что я в полной мере ответил на ваше письмо и по поводу
дискуссии на Википедии.

Все изложенное выше является официальной позицией представляемой мной
компании и может быть цитируемо и публикуемо без изъятий.


Best regards,
-----------------------
Yuri Rosich
Marketing manager
Vector-Images.com
http://vector-images.com
support@vector-images.com

--Panther 13:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Great! Thank you! --EugeneZelenko 14:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

What does the above say about derived images? For this license to be compatible with "Definition of Free Cultural Works" it must be free enough to allow e.g. vectorisation of their images. /Lokal_Profil 15:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

free used on other web sites or any other media for any purposes with quote to Vector-Images.com. --Panther 18:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Vectorization is not deprecated. VI.com is deprecating only redistibution of their vector images, which can be find on CD-collections. Alex Spade 18:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, just wanted to make sure that the obvious thing of tracing the raster images into vector images is allowed. I was just checking since this seems to be one of the most commons questions about this license. /Lokal_Profil 23:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Moratorium on further uploads from vector-images.com

I'd like to add verbiage to the template similar to [4] to the effect that uploads to Commons after May 8, 2007 using this tag may be subject to speedy deletion without further notice. This would be a stop gap measure to halt further uploads, as it appears we do not have compatible permissions with vector-images.com and it is likely we never will have that compatibility. Agree? Disagree? --Durin 16:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree. I should have done this months ago when I posted above. :( --Gmaxwell 16:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree. :( Alex Spade 16:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree. / Fred Chess 20:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've modified the template to reflect this change; effective today, no further uploads of vector-images.com images. --Durin 13:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Decisions on previously uploaded images

The moratorium on further uploads with this tag is a stop gap measure. I think most of us agree that vector-images.com permissions are not compatible with our permissions stance.

Next step; what do we do with all images previously uploaded under this tag? There's more than 3000 of them. We could:

1. Leave them in place, untouched. Leaves us exposed to copyright concerns.
2. Delete them all, and let the various projects depending on these images find acceptable alternatives over time. This is the least time intensive upfront, especially for Commons, but could cause temporary grief for a number of people scattered across various projects.
3. Case by case analysis of each image, putting each up for deletion over time. This is highly time consumptive and the most inefficient. But, offers the benefit of the least disruption.

Opinions? Other alternatives? --Durin 13:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Variant 1 - bad, Variant 2 - absolutlly bad, Variant 3 - good with some additions.

• а) There are many images in those 3000, who can be (re)licensed as {{PD-RU-exempt}} (or more exactly as {{PD-art|PD-RU-exempt}}) and other PD-exUSSR-exempt license tags. The bot for PD-RU-exempt-images can be wrote relatively simple, the many of flags and coas from Russia can be found at corresponding categories. Alex Spade 14:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• b) Also we have got {{PD-Coa-Germany}}, {{Military Insignia}}, {{PD-Coa-Finland}}, {{PD-CzechGov}}, {{PD-RO-Symbol}} and many others. Or {{PD-art|corresponding license tag}}
• c) Only after retaging with help of these templates we could start the deletion for remainder of images.

Alex Spade 14:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I think we can do this only for images which looks exactly as official COAs, otherwise Vector-Images.com own copyrights on their interpretations of COAs. --EugeneZelenko 14:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Agreed completely. My words were about official-like images, the interpretations are copyrighted, see warning section at {{PD-RU-exempt}}. Alex Spade 20:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

We should probably just speedy all the ones which are unused. If no one objects I'll automate checking their usage then deleting them. --Gmaxwell 21:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I think, it will be better to compose the gallery of such images before deletion for last check of other users. But I agree, that after check unused images may be deleted wihout req. for deletion. Alex Spade 04:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Main questions. Is the decision for deletion or retaging images from VI.com definitive? Or have we been waiting some answer from VI.com? I know some images, which cann't be retaged by other free licenses absolutely. Can I moved them to speedy deletion? Or is the normal deletion request more preferred? Alex Spade 20:47, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• Are there any comments? Alex Spade 11:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, I've got a little comment No1. Some Russian municipal coas and flags are unused now because of there are no articles for it, especially corresponding districts of federal subjects. They should'n be deleted now as unused, the creation of these articles is in progress. --Panther 06:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • And a little comment No 2. Russian municipal signs mostly was uploaded by me (about 2500 in number), I've got a list and can easily retag them using my bot account. --Panther 06:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I been taking care of them on English Wikipedia, only about 20 or so to deal with left. I am letting users retag the images there; if they fail to do so, I will bring out the deletion hammer. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Do they really own the copyright?

I recently used Image:Dublin city coa.gif in a wikipedia article, Now while Vector Images.com claim copyright for this image there is no way they do. See [Dublin City Website] This Image is in the Public Domain (AFAIK) and has been in use since the 1600's If it is not PD then Dublin City Council will have Copyright for it, If that was the Case. I could draw a depiction of a Manchester United Crest in Vector Format and Claim Copyright? Is this not similar to the Brands of the World situation? Stabilo boss 11:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• This situation is just one of the reasons vector-images.com images are problematic. Delegating our copyright decisions to a third party like this is bad business, most especially when we certainly have the horsepower to do it ourselves. I agree; contact City of Dublin about copyright on the arms and see what they say. If it is copyrighted and you want to ask for release, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission. --Durin 14:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• • Yeah I think I'll drop Dublin City Council a mail and see what the Situation is... I know that other Organisations (Dublin G.A.A., Shelbourne F.C., Dublin City F.C. and Dublin City themselves had trouble copyrighting the crest, all used derivatives of the crest and have introduced different designs for copyright purposes. I think Vector Imags.com are Chancing their arm claiming Copyright. While they may hold intellectual property rights over their own vector image, the design itself cannot be considered their own CR. Stabilo boss 14:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposal for new template content

I don't think that this is good solution. If we just declare their images PD, we'll violate Vector-Images.com terms of use. In any case they could hold copyrights on their interpretation of coats of arms, which design are in PD. --EugeneZelenko 15:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

VI copyright violations

I just found out that VI was selling an image, without attribution, that I made and uploaded to Wikipedia under CC and GNU copyrights. They credited "Sergei Golikov" with making it.[5] I sent them an email, and they removed it right away. In the meantime, a raster version was actually uploaded to Wikipedia with full credit to VI. That's how I found out about it. See Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Escudo de Gales.png.

I don't think we can trust VI to be honest about where they got their images, especially after this incident. Ipankonin 10:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Ooops! / Fred J (talk) 03:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

New template layout

This image will be deleted on _ ____ 2008. See the deletion equest.

If the image is ineligible of copyright, please ________

	This image appears to have come from the vector-images.com website. bla bla bla.
	The Vector-Images.com term of use states: bla bla bla

Category:problem tags

a boilerplate as yet _→AzaToth 13:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Despite the emails we got saying we cannot use their images for resale or anything like that, the template was still kept. IMHO, we get so many problems with the images and with the site, let's use as little as we can from the website. We should still replace the rasters we have if we have a vector image in place. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 16:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Reopened the request. /Lokal_Profil 18:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)