Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ole Miss Rebels football 2009 Unsatisfied.gif
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.
Original uploader (to Flickr) selected cc-by-sa 2.0 as a license, but this is a derivative of a copyrighted work (logo) and the uploader does not obviously have relicensing authority (see Colonel Reb for reference). NathanT 01:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
- I just hadn't changed my sig since my rename. The "old man in a red suit" in both images is obviously the same character, even without the context clues of "Ole Miss" and "Rebels" on the image - that makes it is a derivative work. Use of a derivative is typically governed under fair use, unless the license of the original allows modification and redistribution. I'm assuming since the original logo (on en.wp, uploaded by you?) has a fair use rationale, it wasn't published as cc-by-sa 2.0. NathanT 13:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
- As many a high school and a few colleges use the same logo, I'm not so sure the man himself without the words Ole Miss and Rebels is trademarked or copyrighted. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 15:44, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- You're not sure? Part of uploading images is that it is incumbent upon you to know the license. You seriously just hoped for the best? This, mixed with your history of copyright violations at en.wiki, has me very concerned. You do understand that we here at commons are trying to build a free (as in free speech, not as in free beer) source for images and media unencumbered by restrictive licensing. Your actions seem to suggest that is not why you are here. --98.248.193.79 20:07, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe you should try logging in before making accusations, or at least identifying yourself. I normally don't respond to smartasses but I'll make an exception here. Seeing as how any college or high school can apparently use the very same logo, It doesn't make since that it would be copyrighted or trademarked.. not without the accompanying identifying words of the school. I can think of 3 high schools here in Mississippi off the top of my head that are using the very logo right now. UNLV uses a variation of it. There's a semi-pro rugby team in Alabama that uses the logo. I'm just saying, I don't believe the old man in a red suit depicted here is copyrighted or trademarked, not when there's so much blatant and public use of it by different organizations that really have nothing to do with each other. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 23:09, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- Asking me to login presumes i have an account. I rather like having an ip that rotates every few hours, makes it easier to be judged on my contribution and not my user name. Answer me this about those other orginizations... do they have a license to use the image from the university? Are they in fact committing copyright violation? This wouldn't be the first time a semi pro and school athletic program has done that. Or is the image under a free license? You did not do the kind of fact checking that we require here, don't take your anger with that out on me, and leave the personal attacks out of your response, please. --99.35.131.12 03:23, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed, rova, indeed. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 15:51, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you. -98.248.193.79 16:11, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed, rova, indeed. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 15:51, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- Asking me to login presumes i have an account. I rather like having an ip that rotates every few hours, makes it easier to be judged on my contribution and not my user name. Answer me this about those other orginizations... do they have a license to use the image from the university? Are they in fact committing copyright violation? This wouldn't be the first time a semi pro and school athletic program has done that. Or is the image under a free license? You did not do the kind of fact checking that we require here, don't take your anger with that out on me, and leave the personal attacks out of your response, please. --99.35.131.12 03:23, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe you should try logging in before making accusations, or at least identifying yourself. I normally don't respond to smartasses but I'll make an exception here. Seeing as how any college or high school can apparently use the very same logo, It doesn't make since that it would be copyrighted or trademarked.. not without the accompanying identifying words of the school. I can think of 3 high schools here in Mississippi off the top of my head that are using the very logo right now. UNLV uses a variation of it. There's a semi-pro rugby team in Alabama that uses the logo. I'm just saying, I don't believe the old man in a red suit depicted here is copyrighted or trademarked, not when there's so much blatant and public use of it by different organizations that really have nothing to do with each other. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 23:09, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- You're not sure? Part of uploading images is that it is incumbent upon you to know the license. You seriously just hoped for the best? This, mixed with your history of copyright violations at en.wiki, has me very concerned. You do understand that we here at commons are trying to build a free (as in free speech, not as in free beer) source for images and media unencumbered by restrictive licensing. Your actions seem to suggest that is not why you are here. --98.248.193.79 20:07, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- As many a high school and a few colleges use the same logo, I'm not so sure the man himself without the words Ole Miss and Rebels is trademarked or copyrighted. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 15:44, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
- I just hadn't changed my sig since my rename. The "old man in a red suit" in both images is obviously the same character, even without the context clues of "Ole Miss" and "Rebels" on the image - that makes it is a derivative work. Use of a derivative is typically governed under fair use, unless the license of the original allows modification and redistribution. I'm assuming since the original logo (on en.wp, uploaded by you?) has a fair use rationale, it wasn't published as cc-by-sa 2.0. NathanT 13:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
- Interestingly, I just found several businesses that use it too. One a guitar shop and another a plumbing company. I just don't believe the actual character himself is copyrighted or trademarked by anyone, other than with the name of a school or business. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 21:10, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- I've got a call into the University's licensing office. Hope to hear something tomorrow. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 03:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Delete, per Commons:Fan art#Copyright in fan art. I think the section "Re-drawing does not avoid copyright infringement" applies pretty well here. And although the section "Ideas aren't copyrighted" supports Allstarecho's argument that they don't have a copyright on old men in red suits, I think there are enough creative elements common to both representation to call this image a derivative work. –Tryphon☂ 12:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 12:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
