Wikipedia:Logos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is considered a guideline on Wikipedia. It is generally accepted among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. However, it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.

Shortcut: WP:L WP:LOGOS WP:LOGO

While logos are very useful to help confirm that an article is about the thing (company, organization, item, or event usually) which has that logo and to indicate how those responsible for the logo wish to be seen (hereafter referred to as "owner"), the close association between some logos and its trademark and/or copyright holder (the owner) makes their use a sensitive topic, so some care is desirable.

The encyclopedic rationale for including a logo is similar to the rationale for including portraits of a famous actor, for example. It is difficult to explain in words what information is conveyed by such a portrait, yet most users feel that they provide something valuable. The logo should be regarded as a portrait. However, unlike people, where it is often possible to take a free photograph of that person, logos are typically protected by copyright and/or trademark. Therefore, their use must also conform to Wikipedia's fair use guidelines.

The following law and guidelines can help to ensure trademark and copyright compliance:

[edit] Guidelines

• Logos should be presumed to be trademarks and/or copyrighted.
• Avoid using a logo in any way that creates an impression that the purpose of its inclusion is to promote something. Generally, logos should be used only when the logo is reasonably familiar (or when the logo itself is of interest for design or artistic reasons).
• Logos should not generally be used in contexts which are, taken as a whole, strongly negative. In an article about what the logo rerepresents (the company or whatever) or an article discussing the visual style of the creator of the logo or its history and evolution are fine. Within the article, the real logo should generally be used near the introductory paragraph, adjacent to text which is simply descriptive and which presents a clearly neutral point of view. People tend to recognize logos quickly, so a placement at the start helps the logo to do its job and confirm that people have arrived at the right article. This does not mean that we should censor the article - only that we place the logo near neutral text, not in the middle of long negative passages.
• Defaced logos or logo parodies should be used with care and not given undue prominence. For example, parodies of logos may be carefully used under fair use in an article about a parody site or campaign.
• When uploading a logo, whether current or historical, include the {{logo}} template message in the image description:

• Reasonable diligence should be taken to ensure that the logo is accurate and has a high-quality appearance. Common sense says that a logo displayed prominently on the logo owner's own website should be OK to use, because it represents their wishes about how the logo is presented on computer screens at typical screen resolutions. Avoid resizing a logo—try to find one that is a suitable size. Do not use a resized logo if it doesn't look good. Overly high-resolution versions of logos should be avoided, however, as they are less likely to be fair use.
• Where possible, logos should be uploaded in PNG format. JPEG format should not be used as it is lossy and results in a less professional appearance.
• Usually, the current logo should be the logo presented. When a historical logo is used, the caption should indicate this.
• Special care should be taken in using logo of any encyclopedia or other reference work be used in a Wikipedia article. While it may not be more likely to be copyright or trademark infringement, it may be potential ammunition for those with a strong financial incentive to cause the project problems.
• It is not necessary to seek formal permission from the owner in advance of using their logo, so long as the usage is fair use, does not create any impression that the logo is associated with or endorses Wikipedia or the article it appears in, and does not create any reasonable grounds for complaint by the owner. The purpose of the specific guidelines above is to meet these conditions.
• In the event that the owner objects to the use made of a logo, the suggested action is for the owner to remove the logo themselves, and identify themselves and their reasons for removing it on the associated talk page.
• In the case of any dispute, the burden of proof is on the person who wishes to include the logo. This does not mean, however, that one person may veto a consensus on the use of the logo, unless that person is the owner of the logo.
• When a logo is removed because of an objection on the part of the owner, no attempt should be made to re-insert the logo (except perhaps under very extraordinary circumstances, and only after extensive discussion). The other provisions of this policy are intended to cover ordinary, common-sense usage. When the circumstances are unusual and the use of the logo is in dispute, this policy should not be cited as weighing on the side of inclusion.
• Logos that contain slogans should be omitted in favour of equivalent logos that do not.

[edit] U.S. trademark law

U.S. law protects the use of trademarks by nonowners for purposes of criticism and commentary. First Amendment considerations override any expressive, noncommercial use of trademarks. "The Constitution is not offended when the [Maine] antidilution statute is applied to prevent a defendant from using a trademark without permission in order to merchandise dissimilar products or services. ... The Constitution does not, however, permit the range of the antidilution statute to encompass the unauthorized use of a trademark in a noncommercial setting such as an editorial or artistic context." (emphasis added) L.L. Bean, Inc. v. Drake Pubs., Inc., 811 F.2d 26, 31, 33 (1st Cir. 1987.)

Similarly, the Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 does not apply to the "noncommercial use" of a famous mark. 15 U.S.C. 1125(c)(4)(B). The U.S. Supreme Court has defined "commercial speech" as "speech which ... propose[s] a commercial transaction." Virginia Pharmacy Ed. v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748, 762 (1976.)

The only limit on this right is whether someone might think that the commentary was produced by the trademark owner. "[A]n author certainly would have a First Amendment right to write about the subject of the Boy Scouts and/or Girl Scouts. However, this right is diluted by trademark law insofar as that author cannot present her subject in a manner that confuses or misleads the public into believing, through the use of one or more trademarks, that those organizations have produced or sponsored the work in question." (emphasis added) Girl Scouts of the United States v. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc., 808 F. Supp. 1112 at 1121, n. 12 (S.D.N.Y. 1992.)

[edit] U.S. government agencies

Specific U.S. law prohibits the reproduction of designated logos of US government agencies without permission. Use restrictions of such logos should be followed and permission obtained before use, if required.