Jump to content

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 September 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Patrickneil (talk | contribs) at 16:16, 11 September 2009 (September 11: TH). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

September 11

Image claims to be PD, licensed GFDL CC-BY-SA-3.0. Myspace photo highly doubtful its free. εω (talk) 02:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be way beyond the standards of PD-textlogo, which is being abused on several TV station logos. Whatever the threshold of originality is, this is surely on the other side of it. Compare File:NBC logo.svg. (ESkog)(Talk) 02:21, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, there are several users out there who consider this logo to be in public domain. User:Black Kite, an admin who has been removing NF logos from television stations, has considered this logo to be in public domain. You can't compare a peacock to a logo with overlapping coloured circles. May I also refer you to Wikipedia:MCQ#Public_domain_question?  єmarsee Speak up! 04:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Logo is Public domain as it is not original enough as typeface and simple geometric shapes can not be copyrighted. Please see this discussion. Powergate92Talk 04:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another abuse of PD-textlogo. The color scheme, shading, and organization of elements renders this more than just a typeface. (ESkog)(Talk) 02:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just because a logo has color doe's not make it copyright please see Template talk:PD-textlogo. Powergate92Talk 04:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What, exactly, on that talk page is relevant to this discussion? All I see is one thread where one person makes some claims. (ESkog)(Talk) 11:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another abuse of PD-textlogo. The "45" logo doesn't match any typeface I've ever seen. (ESkog)(Talk) 02:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another abuse of PD-textlogo; the background image clearly represents a copyrightable work, even though the text on the front doesn't. (ESkog)(Talk) 02:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another abuse of PD-textlogo. A logo which is stylized to look like text doesn't automatically create a "typeface". (ESkog)(Talk) 02:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How so? Any logo with purely text, no matter how stylized the text. May I refer you to Wikipedia:PD#Fonts? Any attempt at creating a character should be considered to be a typeface.  єmarsee Speak up! 04:17, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The CW logo is not stylized it is in Script (typefaces). Powergate92Talk 04:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1960s press photo from indystar.com - PD-self license is unlikely to be correct. dave pape (talk) 02:37, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Album cover being used in article about the artist fails WP:NFC#Images #1. Also has no licence or fair use rationale. ww2censor (talk) 05:18, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Depicted sculpture is probably copyrighted. The USA does not have freedom of panorama other than for buildings. Stifle (talk) 08:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I worried this would raise suspicions, and I even emailed the school. Maybe I'll get a response soon, but the sculpture is a representation of their their logo, the way many school have their a statue of their mascot, or businesses have their logo out front.-- Patrick {oѺ} 16:16, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph of a back album cover. Cover does not look simple enough to be considered PD. J Milburn (talk) 09:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The page Tróndur Bogason was deleted per PROD. In addition, there is no source, author, or media description on the file, making it difficult to know whether this might be an unfree file. Cnilep (talk) 15:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]