Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hrvatski sabor logo.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:Hrvatski sabor logo.jpg

No evidence this logo would be free. Eleassar ^(t/p) 13:44, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

 Keep PD-CroatiaGov applies. Fry1989 ^eh? 20:59, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't think this logo has been "disclosed for the purpose of officially informing the public." Inform about what? --Eleassar ^(t/p) 08:28, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

It is the same license used for other national symbols of Croatia, this is no different. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

This is not a national symbol. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 20:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is. It is a symbol of the national parliament and therefore a symbol of the country. Are you going to try and argue that File:Deutscher Bundestag logo.svg is not a national symbol of Germany? Fry1989 ^eh? 20:07, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps I should: "This file depicts the coat of arms of a German Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts (corporation governed by public law). According to § 5 Abs. 1 of the German Copyright law, official works like coats of arms are in the public domain." - the depicted work is a logo, not a coat of arms. Nevertheless, we're discussing another image in this DR. This image is not listed as a national symbol at [1] or [2], and it has not been disclosed for the purpose of officially informing the public. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 06:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

The point is not the differences in the license, but rather the symbol itself. It represents the Government of Croatia and for that reason it is a national symbol. You also don't have any clue whether or not it's even used on documents released by the Sabor for the public, in which case it would be included as PD. I can promise you that as a logo of the parliament itself, it most likely has been. You have no understanding at all. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:44, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

You have no reliable evidence (sources) for your claims: 1) that it is a national symbol; 2) that it has been included in official documents; and most important, required by law for a work to be considered public domain: 3) that it has been disclosed for the purpose of officially informing the public. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 18:31, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Actually I do by the simple fact it is the symbol of the national parliament and therefore the national government. You interpret licensing as extremely literal and that is your faultpoint. The license also states "(2) news of the day and other news, having the character of mere items of press information", which means it does not have to be explicitly disclosed by the Government, but simply the press may make mention of it. There is zero reason to assume as a high profile work the Croation Government this is not PD like the coat of arms. Fry1989 ^eh? 20:06, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Per the Constitution of Croatia, the official language of Croatia is Croatian. How can then a logo with English words be an official work in the legal sense, or even a national symbol? This would be unconstitutional. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 21:49, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

You have to be joking. That's seriously your argument? That the parliament using a logo with another language on it besides Croatian makes it unconstitutional and somehow therefore it can not be an official work or PD as a national symbol??? Talk about grasping at straws. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:09, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok, this one seems to be incorrect, as there is another symbol with English text cited as official at [3]. However, I still think there is significant doubt that the logo classifies as an official work and an official symbol of Croatia, because:

• it has not been "disclosed for the purpose of officially informing the public"
• it has not been listed among the national symbols of Croatia anywhere
• official works are usually considered those that are passed through an official procedure and/or published in an official journal (Narodne novine), which is not the case with this logo.

It is also not a "news item" as you have claimed. If you still believe that it is a national symbol and meets the criteria for official works defined by the act, please provide a source that explicitly states this. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 19:34, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I haven't claimed anything! All I've said is that this is clearly a national symbol and therefore if it was used in any national context such as official releases, including news stories, it's PD by the law. Then you tried to pull some stupid contrived idea that because it has English on it and Croatian is the official language, it is somehow "unconstitutional" which is laughable. You retracted your DR, you have nothing that would cause this to be deleted other than your own self-doubt which is based on highly questionable reasoning. Fry1989 ^eh? 19:51, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok, in which official releases was it used? --Eleassar ^(t/p) 20:10, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't have to show any, you're again taking this so literal when it isn't. The way the license is written means that any release from the Croatian Government which includes this logo, whether it was for public information, for the news, or for whatever else, would make it PD. It's nearly 0% chance that it never has, which means this is PD. You don't have a leg to stand on. Fry1989 ^eh? 00:50, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, you do have to show at least one, as the burden of proof is on the uploader, and your statements alone do not constitute any evidence. Not to say that except for those works that have been published through an official procedure, it remains unknown what constitutes an official work in Croatia. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 23:36, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

 Keep PD-CroatiaGov. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 01:44, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

---

Kept: well, er, no clear consensus to delete and/or any clear assertions that this is non-free. Might be worth mentioning at COM:VPC FASTILY 07:55, 12 October 2013 (UTC)