Template talk:Raëlism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Non free logo in template space?
The subject of using a not-completely-free image outside of article space (i.e. templates) has come up previously Template_talk:ScientologySeries/Archive_2#Logo_removal. I believe that it was found that under current Wiki rules, fair use only applies to use in actual articles and not templates. I'd be interested to know if there's anything authoritative on the subject. AndroidCat 18:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- No, it's true, the logo shouldn't be in the template. It's just right as a representation for the religion, though. <sigh> The new composite image, created by user:Kmarinas86 has to go as well, since it's made of copyrighted images, and is therefore not a legal self-made image. Lexicon (talk) 00:14, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Why should people copyright things they don't make money off of? If it was an actual product, I would understand it being copyrighted. But this is just ridiculous. The true meaning of copyright has been forgetten. If anything, it should be a trademark, not a copyright.Kmarinas86 03:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I'm not certain if they really meant copyright or a trademarked symbol, but that's the way it came down. (As I said, I'd be interested to know if there's a policy or guideline explaining the actual rules.) Apparently a photograph of a Scientology building with their cross on it couldn't be used either. I'm not even sure that if CoS said "fine, use it!" could it be used in a template since the trademark is still attached. (But it's fine as fair use in an actual article...) The legalities get very complex especially when other sites re-publish or translate the content from Wikipedia. In the end, someone's picture of an e-meter was the best non-trademarked compromise for the template. (I wish the idiot Hagerbot would give even 30 seconds to sign after posting. This really is annoying.) AndroidCat 04:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- (Apparently you can opt out from the bot. So I did. AndroidCat 04:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC))
- I'm not certain if they really meant copyright or a trademarked symbol, but that's the way it came down. (As I said, I'd be interested to know if there's a policy or guideline explaining the actual rules.) Apparently a photograph of a Scientology building with their cross on it couldn't be used either. I'm not even sure that if CoS said "fine, use it!" could it be used in a template since the trademark is still attached. (But it's fine as fair use in an actual article...) The legalities get very complex especially when other sites re-publish or translate the content from Wikipedia. In the end, someone's picture of an e-meter was the best non-trademarked compromise for the template. (I wish the idiot Hagerbot would give even 30 seconds to sign after posting. This really is annoying.) AndroidCat 04:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
-
