Commons:Deletion requests/Star Trek TNG insignia

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Star Trek TNG insignia

[edit]

PD ineligible, works of wikipedians (if not works with independent copyright) and not screen captures from the series. Images were deleted with the rationale "Paramount holds right, copyvio" but they are trivial to create with little to no creative work:

Captain insignia using a picture of the sun:

I can add a redish background to that as well:

-- Cat ちぃ？ 14:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete: Paramount created these rank insignia, as can be seen here. The sun image you note above is of the sun, not of Star Trek ranks, so that's irrelevant. The array of these rank insignias creates a body of work that Paramount made; it took substantial creative work to create this array of work to depict the ranks of various starfleet officers. As a body of work, these images are most definitely subject to copyright in the United States. These images are clearly being used in various places to depict Star Trek ranks, they're not just coincidentally created. They are derivative works of the original Paramount creations. --Durin
    • It takes very little creative work to create a drawing of 4 pins. The key element for copyrightability under U.S. law is that copyrighted material must show sufficient originality. Also in the series the insignia were always shown over a black bg: [1] -- Cat ちぃ？ 15:06, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
      • As I just noted above, it's the entire body of work we're talking about. Paramount didn't just make a gold circle. They made an entire rank system represented by these images. --Durin 15:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • An interesting point about Paramount inventing the rank system. Actually, what they did was take the existing stripe system from the United States Navy and convert it where a stripe equaled a pip and a half stripe equaled a hollow pip. Therefore, then, was the basic idea of these insignia taken from the Navy? And if so does the Navy in fact own the rights to Star trek insignia. Getting technical can bring up such deep question; personally, I think they are circles and cant be copyrighted. -OberRanks 07:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • We do not mass delete like that. We consider the copyright status of images individually not as a group. You are talking about trademark restrictions maybe, just not copyright. -- Cat ちぃ？ 15:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep For one thing, it's only a minor variant on standard pips used for hundreds of years in various armies. For another thing, it's just circles and lines. Adam Cuerden 15:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: In discussions on IRC related to this set of images, there seems to be pretty consistent determination that copyrights can not be held to an image when said image is comprised entirely of geometric shapes and colors. For demonstration purposes, I uploaded this image. Please note that this image is comprised entirely of a gold-yellow squares all of exactly the same color and dimensions. Therefore, this image is not subject to copyright, correct? Is this the rule we're supposed to follow? How long do you think it would take for the McDonald's lawyers to show up if I made a million t-shirts with this image on them and how well do you think my defense in court would hold up? --Durin 16:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Per Adam Cuerden. Ineligible, pd-old, etc. These images do not infringe on the copyright simply by creating a few dots.Patstuart 16:54, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because they're standard military insignia. Even if these were a violation of Star Trek's rights, then, in fact, Star Trek would be a violation, under such rules, of the military insignia, meaning, in fact, that it's either pd-ineligible or pd-old. Patstuart 16:11, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • They're standard military insignia? Really. From what country? Be aware; we recently hashed out the copyright status of military insignia and found that it's a case by case basis. --Durin 18:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete All of the images were drawn by me. When I drew these images in 2005, I was a noob at copyright issues. I thought, at the time, that I could just draw anything and PD it. Because of what I did, others have decided to follow me in that tactic. Under the US law, the copyright holder of the work can issue authorization for derivative works to be made on their work. In my case, Paramount hasn't told me I can do it. I doubt anyone even sent a email to Paramount saying can I do what I did. As Durin pointed out, the series doesn't meet the threshold for being PD-Old yet. Another thing I notice is that on a lot of fansites, they have the copyright notice from Paramount about Star Trek images. At best, these images can be fair use, and the Commons cannot host that. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: White Cat, the bringer of this deletion request, asked about these images on Jimbo's talk page back in the spring of 2006 here. Jimbo's response? "I think these are almost certainly copyright violations." Just some food for thought. --Durin 20:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    And yet he did not delete them... -- Cat ちぃ？ 17:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
    Yet his opinion was clear. --Durin 18:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The insignia consist of circles on a background pattern which anyone can create. The easiest way to clear up once and for all what Paramount thinks of this is to ask them, which no one ever has. I imagine they would probably say these are trival and can be recreated. I suggest a letter to Paramount Pictures asking them straight up to settle this once and for all. -OberRanks 20:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep These are too simple to be copyrighted, even in the US. The "body of work" argument is besides the point: the fact that a work is copyrighted doesn't mean that every part of it is too, especially small or trivial parts (if the rank system as they created it is copyrightable, which, again, is doubtfull). The McDonald argument is even worse - sure, any raster graphic is made up of pixels, and even though the pixels are not copyrighted, the whole thing may be. The argument is that an image that only shows simple shapes in a trivial configuration is not copyrightable (Demologoimage.gif shows the McDonald Logo, which is a trademark and possibly copyrighted). Final comment: if you deem the insignia copyrighted, would this be derivative work? [OOOO] -- Duesentrieb ⇌ 20:38, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have emailed Paramount, so I am not sure what they are going to say. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Any action to keep/delete these images is really based on Paramount's reaction to Zscout370's query. Any other conclusion about this is just guessing. Further, I don't see anyone here claiming to be a lawyer. Thus, we're all taking shots in the dark about the copyrightable nature of these images. 100 people saying keep here, and 1 saying delete does not mean images are legally free and clear for us to use. I don't think we should be substituting consensus for legal advice. --Durin 13:14, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But who says that Paramount's answer will follow copyright laws? Of course they will say that these symbols are copyrighted by them and can't be used without their approval. Why should they let their lawyers verify whether these images are copyrightable when they can just say "no, you can't use it" (and I doubt Zscout370's email will be answered by a lawyer, but rather by some marketing/public relations guy). --91.65.124.34 02:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I must agree with the IP on this one. Even if they do answer in the affirmative, it's not necessarily their right to make the claim. I could ask the guy down the street if he owned the copyright to a picture to something, and there's a good chance he'd say yes, if only for self-interest (though I'm not necessarily doubting Paramount's good faith on the issue). Patstuart 15:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I got an email reply from Paramount this morning; they have stated that the insignia images are copyrighted and are still talking with me about that issue. I wonder if I can forward this email to OTRS or not. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have sent the email to the Wikimedia OTRS, the ticket number is #2007110910014659. Since I am an OTRS staff person, I am going to let another staff member deal with this. However, given the email I just got, I still believe we should move them back to en.wikipedia for the time being. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:51, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - copyrighted images, per OTRS ticket #2007110910014659. WjBscribe 23:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I may be reading the ticket wrong, but I do not see a reply from Paramount on the ticket indicating that they consider these to be under copyright, nor do I necessarily take their claims to be authoritative, as they have a rather alarmingly large amount invested in overzealous copyright protection being, you know, a major media company and all. Phil Sandifer 00:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have to scroll down to where it says my name, your email was forarded..."Could you please provide the links of the applicable websites so that I can see how the site is using the copyrighted materials please." That was the statement that I used to believe the images are copyrighted. The very basic ones were restored and tagged with a different license template. I have no reason to believe Paramount is lying, but I still believe that we should not have them on the Commons. You're welcome to have them placed on en.wikipedia or a similar project that allows fair use. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How is what paramount says any relevant. They would claim anything was under their copyright should you asked them. They aren't necessarily lying but I seriously doubt that response has a legal binding. -- Cat ちぃ？ 20:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Because they hold the copyright. I received a longer reply from CBS lawyers this morning and they confirmed the insignia is under copyright and anything Star Trek related is still under copyright. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see. So CBS holds the copyright to any yellow circle. Thats just silly. -- Cat ちぃ？ 22:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
A series of yellow circles arranged in a certain way.Geni 23:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Meaning? Mind elaborating? -- Cat ちぃ？ 00:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
there is an entire series of these items while a single one may count as de minimis the series would probably not.Geni 14:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Leonard Nimoy is not protected by copyright.Geni 23:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am sure paramount would claim the contrary when confronted with a random picture of him. -- Cat ちぃ？ 00:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I got an email about the terms of how we can host the images from CBS; we still cannot host them on the Commons. The terms he set down is for non-commercial use only, which is against the terms of Commons. I am not only willing to send the letter to OTRS again, but I sent the CBS lawyer to OTRS for him to talk with other Foundation officials about the issue. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That only serves to tangle up a simple problem to something unmanageable. I see it as a bad faith move really. -- Cat ちぃ？ 22:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I do have to agree with Cat. I'm not quite sure how we can be hosting Image:Led Zeppelin logo.png and Image:IBM logo.svg as pd-ineligible, but a couple of blips on a background aren't. If someone who is dissenting could elaborate on cat's comment, which I don't believe anyone has done: of course any company will claim a copyright over something if you give them the option. But we shouldn't have been asking them in the first place, because the images are simply ineligible. Patstuart (talk) 00:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Text is more complicated.Geni 14:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So we ask *lawyers* about whether the images are copyrighted, we don't like the answer, then say we shouldn't have asked them in the first place, and then work with answers by people who have no actual training in copyright law? Asking Paramount regarding the image copyright status, and then ignoring their comment that they feel it is copyrighted is insanity. We're just asking for a lawsuit. As for the IBM logo, that's not a general typeface. You show me the font it comes from, and prove to me the font is not copyrighted, then fine. Same goes for the Led Zeppelin logo. --Durin 14:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, we ask *Paramount's* lawyers about whether the images are copyrighted, who we should not have been asking in the first place. For crying out loud, we could ask them if the text "Star Trek" is copyrighted, and they would say yes. In fact, I've known of company's to assert such nonsense (e.g., EB saying you can't sell stuff on eBay if you use our name, EB - i.e., Eddie Bauer). As for those two images, IBM was kept in a discussion. If we asked neutral lawyers, I'll bet we might geta a different answer. No one seems to be addressing this. Patstuart (talk) 17:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And if we asked neutral lawyers, they will most likely say "We have no idea, ask the copyright holder," which is what I did. This was one of the things asked about so many times during these discussions; ask the copyright holder. I did that and you still did not like it. I just do not know what to say now other than I stand behind the actions that were taken. If you want to upload them under fair use on a EDP-acceptable wikipedia, then you can. The lawyer I spoke to says we can. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 14:44, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Star_Trek_TNG_insignia&oldid=12282469"