Template talk:FOTWpic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Templates for deletion This template was considered for deletion on 2006 June 20. The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete.


Contents

[edit] first comma

The first comma in the template is extraneous, and the template seems to be protected! Somebody help. Dave 03:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Comma removed. Zach (Smack Back) Fair use policy 03:46, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images

why are FOTW pics not allowed anymore on wikipedia? i've also noticed this is a protected template... as well, aren't most flags in the Public Domain, anyway? (Like the American Flag, or the Canadian Flag....)

User:Raccoon Fox - Talk 22:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Flags are public domain, yes. But images of flags are not - the rights to them are held by whoever creates the image. The FOTW pics have never been legitimate for use on Wikipedia, since FOTW members retain the right to their images, as is clearly stated on the FOTW website. And yes, the template is protected, since the wording of it was finalised after negotiations between WP admins and FOTW members: changing the wording should only be done after similar negotiation. Grutness...wha? 01:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying that, my friend. I understand now. :) User:Raccoon Fox - Talk 18:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
s'alright :) Grutness...wha? 23:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This tag is bogus and should be deleted

The actual drawing of a flag, that is in the Public Domain, contains no originality and is therefore ineligible for copyright. Mere labor, if not original, is not copyrightable. The FOTW claims are the result of misinformation. --h-stt !? 11:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Creating an image optimized for web display is much more than «mere labor». Comparing skillfully prepared images with “mere” resizings of scanned images or misexported vectorials should make this evident to anyone.

FotW-ws contributers offer they work freely but subjected to a "non-modification / attribute / non-commercial" license agreement. Unfortunately, the latter of this three conditions cannot be met by the Wikipedia licence, so apparently FotW-ws images are off limits for addition to any version of Wikipedia.

The only workaround is to have FotW-ws image contributers independently uploading their images to Wikipedia; this is not unimaginable, as many FotW-ws image contributers are also Wikipedians.

Unauthorized upload from FotW-ws and the use of terms like "bogus" and "mere labor" do not help this issue and may only cause unwanted and unneeded problems to Wikipedia.

-- António Martins-Tuválkin,

  • member of FotW-ml since 1996
  • editor of FotW-ws since 1998
  • FotW listmaster emmeritus (2002-2005)
  • Vexillologist of the Year 2005
  • user tuvalkin at the Esperanto and Portuguese Wikipedias


Dear António, please discuss that on the TfD-Page, not here. But a short comment might be ok: "optimized for web display" means, that you try to create a perfect representation of the flag on the screen. This meets the definition of reproduction, and reproduction is just the opposite of originality. The whole licence of your project is invalid, including your claims regarding use of FOTW-flags on wikipedia, because by your labor no copyrightable works are created. I appreciate your flags a lot, but please try to get someone, who understands about copyright law to review your licence and your claims. --h-stt !? 18:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


Dear H-stt, I don’t plan to waste more time with this “bogus” subject. You seem to be convinced that only originality, not “labor”, is worth compensation. You say a photo of a flag flying in the wind against a nice cloudscape is copyrightable, while an optimized flat depiction of it is not, because the former took “creativity” and the latter “mere labor”. Perhaps you are even right, under the appliable legislation. (Why, even slavery was legal once!) Very well, then. Keep on throwing mud on the worthy project Wikipedia is, fueling its critics by resorting to obscure legalities to support stealing. Keep on stealing, till the spring dries.

[edit] Proposed Addition

Since the template seems to be protected, I adding this box, because it is a flag, and the actual flag my still be copyrighted. (Note the category at the end, remove the nowiki tags before inserting :)--michael180 22:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Public domain This image is a national, governmental, military, royal/vice-regal, civic, organizational or historical flag. This image may or may not be usable in Wikipedia and its precise copyright status should be determined as soon as possible.
*Note: Representations of national flags may be subject to copyright as ordinary two-dimensional works of art under United States law, and fall under the purview of Bridgeman Art Library Ltd. v. Corel Corporation (thus, the source of the image is probably irrelevant to its copyright status if it was designed to faithfully adhere to the original flag).

[[Category:Flag images|{{PAGENAME}}]]

Regardless of copyright, the FOTW images are non-commercial and should be nuked from Wikipedia as soon as possible. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:15, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
However the image still represents a flag. The flag itself my be copyrighted by the national government, or organization behind it, and thus would still remain copyrighted even if someone created an identical free version. Read the bottom of the above box. --michael180 15:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
FOTWimages are a sub-category of Flag images, so I will not inclue the category, but I will add that template. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank You :)--michael180 21:06, 24 June 2006 (UTC)