Template talk:Copyright by Wikimedia

Discuss Template:Copyright by Wikimedia here:

can license logos under GFDL

In my humple private opinion you can license logos under GFDL and still trademark does apply. Everyone is allowed to use and modify the images but he cannot use it as logo. But maybe this is only valid in German law (see [1] section 2). See also other project's logos for instance Image:OpenOffice.org.png and how they are licensed at Wikicommons. -- Nichtich 10:55, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

I was kind of suprised to see that our logos are licenced like this. What's the reason for the special protection of logos when we are giving the entire content away anyway? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 02:43, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Same here. It doesn't make sense to me.

It implies that someone writing an article about Wikipedia, in countries that don't have fair use, cannot use the logo.

On top of that, it's unclear where to ask the required permission to use the logo. From #wikimedia I found out that you have to ask Brad Patrick in an email about it. I won't post his address here. Guaka 01:53, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Hypocrisy

This is crazy... after talking about free licenses and how only free images are accepted how is such a thing tolerable? Any image marked with this template should be subject to deletion because it's with an "all rights reserved" license. --Kprateek88 15:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The way I see it, all rights are reserved on Wikimedia logos or anything using Wikimedia's logos for copyright and trademark reasons. I would like to assume that the images that fall into this category are a very, very small percentage of the images on Wikimedia. --Aristeo 19:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia owns the copyright on it and so can easily grant itself the right to use it. This template only really exists because all the wikis host all their images (Logos included) on Commons for continuity's sake, and an image without a licence tag would be nonsensical. Hence, we have to have a tag for these pics and so we have this tag... 68.39.174.238 15:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Could an admin change...

Could someone with administrative privileges here change this sentence:

Notwithstanding any other statements, this image has not been licensed under the GFDL.

So that the word "not" is italicized, as shown:

Notwithstanding any other statements, this image has not been licensed under the GFDL.

The reasoning behind this is that this is a pretty uncommon statement, and I think it wouldn't hurt to put a little extra emphasis on how these images are not licensed under the GFDL. --Aristeo 19:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I did that, thanks for the suggestion. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 14:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wikimedia-logo.svg

Why is the image "Image:Wikimedia-logo.svg" included in the template "Template:Copyright by Wikimedia"? --88.76.224.177 15:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit request

The requested edit is: Change Image:Red copyright.svg to Image:Yellow copyright.svg. Biggo391 17:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Why? The red C is more scary, which I think is kinda the point... --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 14:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Red C is also used in every Fair Use template on eN, which dulls the emphasis ("Another "fair use" template"). The yellow one is NEVER used anywhere (else), hence it draws attention. You can use the blue one or some outlandish color if you want, but it draws more attention because of the strageness... 68.39.174.238 15:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

What exactly is the point of...

...having "Wikipedia is a registered trademark..." on a COMMONS template that doesn't ONCE mention Wikipedia? 68.39.174.238 15:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

{{editprotected}} I'm requesting a edit to the template because I want to change this;

Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

to

Wikimedia® is a registered trademark of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

Jet123 03:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I suppose it says Wikipedia because this template will be on Wikipedia screenshots. I don't see why we need either of these phrases. Maybe we should ask Alex756 Platonides 15:15, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Would it be too much trouble to list all of the projects? Wikinews, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, etc. There aren't that many. --Tom (talk - email) 00:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, only Wikipedia is actually registered. -- Bryan (talk to me) 17:57, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, the link to Wikimedia visual identity guidelines seems not terribly applicable/useful in a lot of cases. I was looking at the wikipedia logo, and all its variants (Category:Wikipedia logo variants) which use this template. Following through to that 'visual identity guidelines' page, you end up reading about the wikimedia logo, with abosultely zero mention of the wikipedia logo. Whether this template should be adjusted, or that page, I don't know. -- Harry Wood 15:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Interwiki

{{editprotected}} Plz, add interwiki

[[ar:قالب:Copyright by Wikimedia]]
[[bg:Шаблон:CopyrightByWikimedia]]
[[cs:Šablona:Copyright by Wikimedia]]
[[en:Template:CopyrightByWikimedia]]
[[ko:틀:위키미디어 재단 저작권]]
[[ja:Template:Copyright by Wikimedia]]
[[ru:Шаблон:CopyrightByWikimedia]]
[[vi:Tiêu bản:Biểu trưng Wikimedia không tự do]]

Thx. Alex Spade 19:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done --GeorgHH • talk   23:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Rewording

{{Editprotected}}

Due to an email from Wikimedia's lawyer (see w:Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MBisanzBot 2 about it), WMF logos are allowed on Wikimedia wikis outside of articlespace. However, this template does not reflect it. This template should be changed to reflect that it is allowed in any userpage. (edit: Suggested by MBisanz: "Permission is not required for use on any part of a Wikimedia Foundation project") Soxred93 03:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done. giggy _(:O) 09:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

It turns out that the change made above was based on an overly simplified interpretation of the WMF's position. Please see this for more. A more nuanced position is needed. Dragons flight 01:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I have reverted the change here pending further discussion and an agreed wording. giggy _(:O) 03:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Red --> Orange

For discussion. Red-one is associated with copyvio or fairuse. Orange-one is like orange-R in Template:Trademarked and associated with "free but with some limitations" or "partially free". Alex Spade 19:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

But it's not "free but with some limitations". It's "all rights reserved". It's no different from any other company's logo. Rocket000(talk) 02:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Phrase about GFDL

{{Editprotected}} Remove words "Notwithstanding any other statements, this image has not been licensed under the GFDL." - This is unnecessary legacy of old version MediaWiki:Copyright, which said "Content is avaible under...". Now it's says "Text is available under...". Alex Spade 19:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. giggy _(:O) 02:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

fr:Projet:Poster/en

Hello,
To prevent our project to propose the distribution of Posters of pictures taggued with this template, we need javascript to detect it.
Then, could you please add something like this to the template ?
<div id="WikimediaCopyright"></div>
Thanks! Plyd (talk) 09:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Other languages

Does anybody know why the templates in other languages added here is not appearing in the original template and the older ones? Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 (talk) 02:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Already fixed it. It must be edited on the layout page Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 (talk) 02:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Should those images be here at all?

I understand why it has to be copyrighted (stupid law). But since it is, those images are not free. If they are not free, per Commons:Project scope, they shouldn't be here, right? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:22, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I have the same question! If it is not a free image, it doesn't belong on Commons.
/abbedabb^WTF? 13:07, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

It's an agreed variation to that policy that we started Commons with. I'd suggest asking on Commons talk:Project scope about noting the exception.

James F. (talk) 16:56, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

OK. I will continue the discussion on Commons talk:Project_scope#WP logo is not a free image. Please join me there.
/abbedabb^WTF? 14:05, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Trademark policy

Please modify the template to refer to the official Trademark Policy. To accomplish that, I would suggest changing:

Use of the Wikimedia logo is subject to the Wikimedia visual identity guidelines and requires permission.

To

Use of the Wikimedia logos and trademarks is subject to the Wikimedia trademark policy and visual identity guidelines, and may require permission

Dragons flight (talk) 01:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Done for English. Other languages still need to be changed by speakers of those languages. --Slomox (talk) 01:23, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

add fa

I create template:Copyright by Wikimedia/fa please add it to template.--YOShimiTSU (talk) 15:41, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Template redirected

{{WikimediaCopyrightWarning}} redirected here - they appear to serve the same purpose, and this template has a wider range of translations. The only two translations {{WikimediaCopyrightWarning}} had which {{Copyright by Wikimedia}} did not have been transferred across. Rd232 (talk) 15:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Please add eo

I have created Template:Copyright by Wikimedia/eo. Please add it. Thanks! --KuboF (talk) 18:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done. --AVRS (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Exporting?

This template appears to be impossible to export to another wiki. Please could the wikicode be simplified to permit this? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Please add silesian

I have created Template:Copyright by Wikimedia/szl. Please add it. Thanks! Krol111 (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki remove

{{Sudo}} Please delete interwikis migrated into Wikidata. Thanks --레비Revi_D✉CM 07:33, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Note that bgwiki and cswiki's interwiki links are dead. --레비Revi_D✉CM 07:36, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done −ebraminio^talk 20:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Attribute

{{Editprotected}} Add like this: {{cc-by-sa-3.0|Wikimedia Foundation}} --Zunter (talk) 13:59, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

How about {{cc-by-sa-3.0|[[wmf:Contact us|Wikimedia Foundation]]}} remotely following EU-standards? –Be..anyone (talk) 22:18, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

 Done thanks for great suggestion --Jarekt (talk) 02:11, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

No longer non-free

{{Editprotected}}

The Wikimedia Foundation finally joined the free content movement in October last year, so this tag should no longer be marked as non-free. Please remove the line [[Category:License tags non-free|{{PAGENAME}}]] from the template. This should have been done in this edit. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:53, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

You are right I should have done it with that edit. Thanks for alerting us. --Jarekt (talk) 02:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I applaud the Wikimedia Foundation's efforts in freeing Wikimedia logos. I have been using COM:AWB to implement their decision to replace this template with {{Wikimedia trademark}}{{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} per Wikimedia Logos Have Been Freed! by Yana Welinder, WMF Legal Counsel here on Wikimedia Commons with my main account, but speed restrictions have slowed me down, so I am requesting approval for my bot JeffGBot to do that implementation at Commons:Bots/Requests/JeffGBot.   — Jeff G. ツ 08:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

I've commented at Commons:Bots/Requests/JeffGBot, since it's not doing a direct substitution of this template. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

I've addressed your concern there.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Mike Peel (talk) 20:45, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

This page has been relocated to WikimediaFoundation.org.

If I click on Wikimedia Foundation, I get This page has been relocated to WikimediaFoundation.org., mabye we should change the link?  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 15:43, 10 January 2023 (UTC)