Commons:Deletion requests/File:DOGE Logo as of November 14, 2024.jpg

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.

File:DOGE Logo as of November 14, 2024.jpg

Quite borderline, it is not clear if the license is valid. Yann (talk) 07:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the texture is complex and IMO surpasses the US TOO. Perhaps a simpler version could be recreated. Bedivere (talk) 13:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment tbf isn't it likely this is AI-generated like the other DOGE images? --Nintendofan885^{T&Cs apply} 16:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. It does resemble some similar images (based on a Google search image) but this one's texture is what is problematic, not the design itself. Bedivere (talk) 17:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would bet that it is indeed AI-generated (both on appearance and how much Musk uses AI-generated images on social media for DOGE and beyond), but we can't definitively claim that without confirmation, and it shouldn't be a factor in this discussion unless it's confirmed. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 11:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The texture is as basic as can be. Not relevant as qualifier for copyright. BarntToust (talk) 17:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The image is made of simple shapes and qualifies under {{PD-textlogo}}. The texture, in my opinion, is no more complex than File:Arkansas map by Sean Pecor.png, a confirmed-by-court case simple shape PD image, as both images have a "3d"-style shape/design and a not-smooth surface. P.S., including what Nintendofan885 stated above, given the other A.I.-generated images associated with DOGE, there is a high-chance this was also A.I.-generated. There is no proof of that, however, I feel like that also strengthens the PD-textlogo / simple-shape PD case for this photograph. WeatherWriter (talk) 16:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per User:WeatherWriter. I don't understand the deletion argument, keeping in mind the following, at COM:TOO US: the US Copyright Office does not consider text effects to be sufficiently unique to render a logo copyrightable, stating that "the mere use of text effects (including chalk, popup papercraft, neon, beer glass, spooky-fog, and weathered-and-worn), while potentially separable, is de minimis and not sufficient to support a registration". Are those who propose deletion figuring that because this is not text, a much more minor effect will make this copyrightable? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per User:WeatherWriter and User:Nintendofan885; I would think of it as AI based on the dollar sign having inconsistency throughout its design. Sharport (talk) 2:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Weak keep – seems like it may be just far enough under the threshold of originality in my opinion. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 18:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WeatherWriter‘s court case and AI statement also has me leaning towards keep. AI images themselves are automatically PD, although they can contain copyright infringing stuff, so care must be taken in that regard. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 18:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And plus, if this does become the DOGE logo; it would unambiguously become PD. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 18:36, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because we’re talking about the logo of a presumably soon-to-be federal government agency. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 18:37, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a simple texture isn't creatively inclined whatsoever, and the discussion of {hell, probably} being AI is another conversation entirely. BarntToust (talk) 17:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Quite a consensus. --Yann (talk) 18:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]