Commons:Deletion requests/File:Der Spiegel Sachsen.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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:Der Spiegel Sachsen.jpg

[edit]

I doubt that {{PD-text}} is applicable in this case. This title page clearly shows creativity - a modern sans-serif font in white changing into brown blackletter, intending to transport a message that can be interpreted as "Saxony is becoming brown" (as associated with Nazism). That's not your usual simple design. One may also argue, apart from this, that the famous design of the "Spiegel" cover itself with its orange border might be original enough for protection - I note that, though we have the isolated logo as {{PD-textlogo}}, there are no other "Spiegel" covers on Commons. And the whole cover of this issue? The individual elements might be simple enough, but in combination... ? Gestumblindi (talk) 18:45, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're missing an important point in your argumentation: It want's transport an message Saxony is becoming brown, like this logo We're a party, that works together with the people :S, but the idea of to do this brown+frakture=nazi is not a idea of the SPIEGEL. So it's only transport the message Saxony is becoming brown in a non creative way. Habitator terrae (talk) 19:05, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The question of whether the logo you mention passes COM:TOO or what exactly its copyright status might be was never discussed. There was a DR a year ago under the mistaken assumption that it was created in 2006, and on this grounds the DR was rejected. It's possible that the legal successor of the SED owns the rights to this logo - in the mentioned discussion, DaB. compared it to the logo of the w:Boy Scouts of America whilst arguing for keeping, but exactly this latter logo is in English Wikipedia only as "fair use" as a copyrighted, non-free work and not available on Commons. But this is rather side-tracking the discussion, of course, therefore: small print. Back to the point: There are of course dozens, maybe hundreds of possible ways to conceive a visual representation of the message "Saxony is becoming brown". But a particular visualization such as this one still involves creativity - I suppose that the designers would be rather offended if you called their work "non creative". Of course, we can discuss - and are discussing right now - whether it's enough creativity. Gestumblindi (talk) 19:26, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This cover is not a simple collection of letters and colours. --Achtzig Hundertsiebenachtzig (talk) 19:39, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For humans being able to read German, see de:WP:UF#Spiegel Titelblatt Now it is in the archive --Habitator terrae (talk) 13:25, 19 September 2018 (UTC) --Habitator terrae (talk) 18:53, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete The visualisation in this cover is above the threshold of originality. // Martin K. (talk) 08:30, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Martin Kraft: Please discuss this here Now it is in the archive --Habitator terrae (talk) 13:25, 19 September 2018 (UTC), because you can speak German, all in this discussion could speak german and de:Benutzer:Chaddy ( Keep) and de:Benutzer:Ralf Roletschek ( Keep) refused to write here. Keep --Habitator terrae (talk) 19:07, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As already mentioned over there, it's pointless to discuss a file on Commons in German Wikipedia (because the decision is made here), but you can discuss in German here, too (for the benefit of potential participants who don't speak German, I will do my best to translate). Gestumblindi (talk) 22:50, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
SED-Logo
All elements of the title page are well known and established (de:"vorbekannte Elemente"), their combination lacks individuality. The district court of Hamburg denied originality in 2004 for the logo left as a combination of established elements: LG Hamburg 10. Dezember 2004 – 308 O 207/04, In GRUR-RR, 2005, Heft 4, S. 106 ff. According to the argumentum a maiore ad minus, the Spiegel title page certainly will not surpass the limits set by the LG Hamburg. Especially as the Spiegel has its seat in Hamburg and will usually go to court there. --h-stt !? 17:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is a combination of known elements (especially the "Sachsen" font, which is historic) that does not merit protection in its own right. Keep. --Gnom (talk) 09:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete The visualisation in this cover is above the threshold of originality. A team of specialized people created a kind of "artwork", if we like it or not. --Stefan Bellini (talk) 19:24, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe you, a team of specialized people create this. But it's not under the threshold of originality, because we don't like it. It's under the threshold of originality, because it's only a non creative composition of known elements, like described by H-stt and Gnom. Habitator terrae (talk) 12:43, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday I sent a mail to Der Spiegel,telling them, what we discuss about. If I get an answer, I will inform you. --Stefan Bellini (talk) 18:11, 27 September 2018 (UTC) I did not get any reply --Stefan Bellini (talk) 18:54, 12 October 2018 (UTC) until now. --Stefan Bellini (talk) 09:20, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:28, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Der_Spiegel_Sachsen.jpg&oldid=336699544"