Commons:Deletion requests/File:DOTA-logo-wis.png
I believe this is above the threshold of originality for shapes, or borderline at least. More specifically, it's a reproduction of a copyrighted logo that otherwise would not be accepted on commons. There are instances of users using this logo reproduction (which is not accurate exactly in color or shape) and claiming its the actual logo or box art of the games it represents. That's a false representation, which I believe would be outside of project scope to encourage. At best, the image should be renamed in a way that clearly indicates it's fan-made and unofficial. -- ferret (talk) 13:35, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
- Keep: This is the best available CC-BY-SA re-creation of a trademarked logo. It is not protected by copyright (as the creator released it in the Creative Commons) and US trademark law does not preclude use in non-commercial projects like Wikimedia projects, according to w:Wikipedia:Logos#Trademark_concerns.
- I do agree that the colours are not exactly right, but the file is reasonably accurate compared to the official Valve-created images, and sufficiently distinct that it cannot be meaningfully mistaken for another logo/shape. I do not agree that using it in relation to Dota 2 related topics is false representation. Further toi that, creator of the file is already detailed in the file metadata. If we were to mark it as 'fan created' we would have to consider marking virtually all files in Category:Logos as such since it is very rare that the trademark owner also publishes the logo as Creative Commons. Melmann (talk) 14:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
- I've made no argument based on trademark, but on copyright. If the logo is below the threshold for pd-shape, then we would simply have the actual logo uploaded which would make this one unnecessary. Having a reproduction like this suggests it's recognized that the original is above threshold and unacceptable for copyright reasons. That makes this an derivative of a copyrighted work. -- ferret (talk) 14:43, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - Ferret's argument is correct. Either we should have the original or nothing. Any close copy is derivative of the original and if it is far enough away from the original to be OK, then it is not useful here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:35, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
