Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Smiling Sun

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files in Category:Smiling Sun

[edit]

per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gekaufte Artikel Nein Danke.svg. The OTRS permission has been called into doubt, (after repeated communication with the copyright holder), and may not show full understanding by the copyright holder of free licensing, derivatives, etc. I've tagged all the files in Category:Smiling Sun that are actual logos, or where the logo is displayed prominently on flags and banners, but if anyone sees any other image in that category that they think should be included in this DR, please add them.

INeverCry 17:42, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment File:Button "Atomkraft? Pfui deibel!.jpg shows a different kind of logo. Holger1959 (talk) 18:25, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The design is based on the format of the Smiling Sun logo. INeverCry 00:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment File:Atomkraftwerk Brunsbüttel - Atomkraft einpacken 17.jpg Hier handelt es sich nach deutschen Urheberrecht um eine Beiwerk. Das bedeutet: Als Beiwerk bezeichnet man im Urheberrecht Personen oder Gegenstände, die sich gleichsam zufällig auf einem Bild (Hauptwerk) befinden. Nach deutschen Urheberrecht erlaubt § 57 UrhG die Abbildung (Vervielfältigung, Verbreitung und öffentliche Wiedergabe) eines urheberrechtlich geschützten Werks ohne Zustimmung des Rechtsinhabers, wenn dieses nur als unwesentliches Beiwerk neben dem eigentlichen Abbildungsgegenstand anzusehen ist.([[User talk:Huhu Uet|Huhu Uet]) 18:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
The permission was given by Siegfried Christiansen, the founder of OOA. In the permission he sign with his name and "Copyright Consultant", "OOA Fonden". So I saw no reason to doubt it at that time. But after a new review of all te mails I agree that the permission is probably not 100 % best practice for permissions. --MGA73 (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Trademark law and copyright law is not the same! Otherwise would must all photos where Protected logos are to see are, cleared. How Coca-Cola, McDonalds logos ...--Jean11 (talk) 19:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment File:Atomkraft? Nej tak.JPG This particular file is from Vestergade in Aarhus, Denmark. According to several sources the logo of the "Smiling Sun", was invented by Anne Lund in the OOA group in Aarhus in 1975.[1][2]It has been claimed that repeated communication with the copyright holder has cast doubt on the logos' OTRS permission. Can anybody source this "repeated communication"? And can somebody please explain what OOA group or "copy right holder" they have been communcating with at least? RhinoMind (talk) 23:26, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The answer to your question is 2 comments above this one. The OTRS comes from Siegfried Christiansen, the founder of OOA, and the OTRS member in communication with him is MGA73. INeverCry 00:07, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot INeverCry! I hope Mr. Siegfried Christiansen can prove he is copyright holder? I will look into the "repeated communication". I am very curious as to why mr. Christiansen suddenly compromises the OTRS permission. I would guees, that he doesnt want it to be used commercially by third parties, but that is just my personal guess. I have limited my own contributions to WikicCommons of exactly the same reason. I dont want to work for free, when other people profits from my contributions. Thanks a lot INeverCry. RhinoMind (talk) 15:35, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment File:Vestergade 7 OOA.jpg This is an image of the same wall mural as the one we discussed above this comment. In the context of the history and background I have described there, I strongly believe, that this particular wall piece has a central historic importance in relation to the OOA organization and of course the Smiling Sun logo itself. It makes the files special. Now, I am not an expert on the laws and regulation of WikiCommons, but I would think that this gives them another status than just ordinary pics of the logo? Perhaps it has a consequence of the deletion requests as well. It would make it rather difficult to describe the Smiling Sun and its history on Wikipedia, if they were deleted and other uploads prohibited. RhinoMind (talk) 16:00, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
keep - We received permission under GFDL by the founder of the NGO and "copyright consultant" after counseling regarding the implications of a Free License. That's all we need to know. The license does not allow any retrospective change of mind. It's too late to cancel the permission. I further demand to restore Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gekaufte Artikel Nein Danke.svg and any other derivats that were deleted based on the flawed interpretation of licenses. Please run a bot to restore all the uses of the already deleted derivative logo. --h-stt !? 07:57, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
These are only the most obvious cases. We really should close this mass request and start discussing the less obvious cases individually. --Rotkraut (talk) 20:15, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as per Rotkraut above. Please only nominate files which might be a problem. Yann (talk) 16:58, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Smiling_Sun&oldid=136394740"