File talk:Wikiquote-logo.svg
9 September 2025
Please change the license to {{Cc-by-3.0}} per meta:Legal:Wikimedia trademarks#Wikiquote.
Waddie96 (talk) 07:42, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
- There is already a license indicating that it has been released into the public domain. Incall talk 16:14, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
- No, the license indicates that someone thinks that this file is not eligible for copyright; it was not the author who released it into the public domain. This “someone” was Krinkle (diff link); I’m not sure if I agree them. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 19:46, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
- In my opinion, the file does not contain original authorship. That’s why I wrote it like that above. Incall talk 03:32, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Tacsipacsi @Incall Trademark rights, copyright, and author attribution are three different things. It may be worth reading the discussion that led to my edit, as it wasn't a personal judgement call. This has implications for screenshots and their licenses. See also March 2011 Village Pump and April 2011 discussions, pages like Category:Wikiquote logos, and related edit where we replaced the inapplicable copyright claims with trademark statements. See also File talk:VisualEditor-logo.svg and edit. Do you dispute the use of Commons:Threshold of originality because an author/company released it with a license? Or do you dispute whether these geometric shapes meet the threshold? Krinkle (talk) 08:00, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- Well, I wrote above what I’m talking about, but I don’t mind adding the license that is proposed in the edit request Incall talk 08:07, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Krinkle: The discussions you linked now don’t contain a lot of arguments, it’s basically just “it is ineligible because of common sense” – well, my common sense doesn’t say this. (And the edit summary of the edit I linked doesn’t refer to them in any way, so I had no way of knowing about them when posting my first comment.)
- I think it reaches the threshold, i.e. it’s copyrightable. It’s simple, but not so simple that anyone thinking about Wikiquote or a quotation collection would come up with this.
- What the company (WMF) says has little legal relevance, though if it turns out to be below the threshold, it’d be nice if someone would update wmf:Legal:Wikimedia trademarks#Wikiquote. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 21:46, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- No, the license indicates that someone thinks that this file is not eligible for copyright; it was not the author who released it into the public domain. This “someone” was Krinkle (diff link); I’m not sure if I agree them. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 19:46, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
Not done @Waddie96: please gain a consensus at COM:VP first. —Matrix(!) ping onewhen replying {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 18:36, 22 December 2025 (UTC)
