Commons:Office actions/DMCA notices: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→BP logo: answer to a few questions from wmf legal |
|||
Line 290:
:::As above, I will not re-open the DR (another amind might), but legal has said (a) it is above TOO; but (b) they aren't forced under copyright law to delete it due to fair use (which is not ok by Commons policy, see COM:CSD#G2). --[[User:Josve05a|Jonatan Svensson Glad]] ([[User talk:Josve05a|talk]]) 22:54, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
:{{ping|JSutherland (WMF)}} after thinking about all this, I suspect that when someone files a DMCA complaint that is invalid because the file is legal per fair use, you won't take action. Which, I think, is actually good. But could you drop the community a note in that case? Perhaps on the village pump, or my talk page (I tend to agree with you so I wouldn't mind proxying for you) Starting the DR yourself might not be ideal because it would put a certain weight on things. Unless you use an anonymous alternative account that isn't in any way connected to the WMF to start the DR. That would also be fine. - [[User talk:Alexis Jazz|Alexis Jazz]] <sup><small>ping plz</small></sup> 15:42, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
::Replying to a few different things here. First, In my other comment on the deletion discussion, I was talking about the U.S. Threshold of originality. The main case in Wikimedia's jurisdiction is [https://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/323_F3d_805.htm Satava v. Lowry], which I might have linked once or twice before on-wiki. It's a case about how a jellyfish sculpture couldn't be copyrighted and talks about how the courts look at the combination of unprotectable elements to decide TOO questions. I think in the case of the BP logo, you've got several creative choices happening in the selection of the four different colors and the application of those colors to the different geometric regions (which are themselves made up of some creative choices around the spacing and proportion of the triangles). It's still relatively simple in that it's a symmetric geometric pattern made of circles and triangles, but I think there's enough there to provide them at least the thin copyright discussed in Satava, which protects against exact copying (and derivative works that include the exact copy). Second point, my comment about fair use and permission was phrased to not lock us into just those reasons. Being a lawyer, I'll never give a totally definitive answer on something like that just in case I need to make other arguments in the future. That said, I think the 1 o'clock image is hosted as a fair use and in the email thread I had with the person representing BP, they told us explicitly that they're fine with the Wikimedia projects hosting the 1 o'clock logo, so that was my reference to fair use and permission. Lastly, on the question of letting you all know if we reject something on fair use grounds, I think we could forward a note to OTRS when that happens, or perhaps note if it's fair use when posted here. We'll try and see if we can do that, might need a reminder the next time it comes up. -[[User:Jrogers (WMF)|Jrogers (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Jrogers (WMF)|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 00:49, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
|