Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fritz bottles on white background.jpg
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.
The characteristic 2-heads logo of this brand might be copyrighted per Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Product_packaging and should at least be discussed. -- Túrelio (talk) 21:49, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
This discussion concerns also:
- File:Fritz-kola bottle.jpg
- File:Fritz-Kola Germany 2014-09-28 1411933901.jpg
- File:Fritz-Kola-01.jpg
- File:Fritz-kola-05.jpg
- File:Currywurst-Pommes bei EDEKA Rumpsmüller in Lippstadt.JPG
Statement of the author
[edit]- Hi, indeed, this is worth a general discussion. I get your point, but the branding is on everything related to fritz. On Wikimedia Commons, there are other photographies of shops, etc. in the street, even from the shop sign, where the two heads are visible. Either we remove everything (!) on Wikimedia with this logo (and have no pictures at all) or we look at it as part of their general public representation (because everything is branded: the truck (pic), the shop sign (pic), the bottles (pic), PR campaigns (pic), etc. etc. etc.).
- Why should we keep it?
- In my eyes, the product is for sale publicly and you can see the bottles it in nearly every shop. For me, my copyright release tag in combination with the trademark note is sufficient. The logo appears as part of the two bottles (it is not the principal object of the picture). In my opinion, we are not necessarily talking about product packaging (according to the WMC copyright rules), which refers primarily to product packaging containing the main copyrighted product (like video games or movies, where screenshots, characters, etc. are printed on the CD/DVD covers). A logo is part of everything a company releases, so it is always contextual (unless it's only the logo itself) work, as it is visible on all products dedicated for the public sale.
- So, (imo,) bottom line:
Keep --Lhennen (talk) 22:24, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- Branding (trademark) is not the problem. The question is whether the graphic element of the logo (the 2 heads) reaches threshold of originality (Schöpfungshöhe in German) or not. Only then it is copyrightable. --Túrelio (talk) 22:35, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- In that case, I would still refer to it as contextual (and inevitable) part of the picture ("Beiwerk"). I would totally agree with you, if the picture would be just the logo. But it's not. It's only "Beiwerk" of the bottles, as it is part of the general public representation of fritz. --Lhennen (talk) 22:39, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- Branding (trademark) is not the problem. The question is whether the graphic element of the logo (the 2 heads) reaches threshold of originality (Schöpfungshöhe in German) or not. Only then it is copyrightable. --Túrelio (talk) 22:35, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no reason to believe the logo is not copyrighted. Kept one as DM. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 01:34, 26 November 2021 (UTC)