File talk:User Ariyen Stvsymbol.gif

If Ariyen made this herself I see no reason to delete it. 07:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I made it a long while back and there's no copy vio that says you can't make something of a favorite that you like. Ariyen 07:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

It could be considered a derivative work, but I'm not really sure. -- pling 19:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

This is a derivative work of a copyrighted image, as displayed on the star trek website. It is not allowed here. --75.72.248.57 16:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Then such image as what Felix uses doesn't belong here. Their copyrights is only for their work, not for the work of the fans. Ariyen 17:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Mine's GFDL-licensed, you can take it up with the original creator if you suspect a violation. He only speaks Italian though. 17:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The GPL is the first copyleft license for general use, which means that derived works can only be distributed under the same license terms. -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License You can not relicense a derivative of a copyrighted image. --75.72.248.57 17:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I am requesting contact from cbs on their word. So where should I have submitted this at first? There on wikipedia to get the gpl? (which is ridiculous if I have to.) Ariyen 17:28, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

CBS would have to release their copyright on the image or they have to release it under the GDFL. I wouldn't hold your breath. --75.72.248.57 17:32, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

You have no idea what I requested, but thank you for your assumption. This one is a derived work, but gfdl so you see where you're wrong? Also, Felix uses this image that I have linked as his talk here. Ariyen 17:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

As the image that Felix is using was previously released under the GDFL by someone other than Felix, on a site other than GW2W, it is available for him to use. If CBS wishes to claim their copyrights on that image, they will have to take it up with that user, and the wikipedia site that allowed him to release it improperly. That is not a problem (or potential problem) for GW2W or a violation of the Copyright terms as determined by ArenaNet. However, you illegally releasing your derivative work of their copyrighted image here is. --75.72.248.57 17:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The image of the Star Fleet badge displayed prominently on http://www.startrek.com with the copyright ownership by CBS indicates that this their image. You have claimed to have "created this yourself" which means that you are the one that is illegally trying to relicense a derived work under the GDFL. I don't see how much clearer this can be. Fan Art is not allowed, unless it is based on ArenaNet copyrighted images, since this is an ArenaNet owned site. --75.72.248.57 17:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Whether one can copyright a shape is a subtle law question I have no idea about. What is entirely clear, however, is that the copyright tag should stay on this page until the discussion is decided in either way, so stop the revert war please. --Xeeron 18:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking the same thing (in reference to the shape). From what I have seen (I did not watch the show), the Star Trek symbol contained a shape in the main body and it did not have a ring around it. This image is a collaboration of 3 shapes (that are simple geometry). The general shape may be the same a shape of a logo, but this image created by Ariyen is a mere homage. Venom20 19:10, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

As Ariyen is banned for longer than the general discussion period for copyvios, I'll post her argument here on her behalf: She has posted this same image to Wikimedia Commons and been told by at least one user in the associated IRC channel that the image should be considered public domain, because it is simple geometry that is ineligible for copyright. - Tanetris 19:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with them. 19:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I personally disagree that this is a "simple geometry", as the it is clear that the image is based on the Star Fleet badge worn by the cast of Star Trek:Next Generation and is prominently featured on http://www.startrek.com under the heading Database Digs. It is an immediately recognizable trademark of the Star Trek franchise. I don't see how by simply posting a copyright violating image in Wikipedia Commons lessens the violation. In Felix's case, he is simply using an image created by someone else though I would be happy if he removed his as well. --75.72.248.57 20:25, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

"is based on" you said it, it is based on, it isn't the copywritten image. By a based on image, we can argue that all checkmarks belong to Nike, or that all upper case M's belong to macdonalds. The image in question is not the actual image used by the star trek franchise. Venom20 20:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

You're reversing cause and effect, Venom. Checkmarks existed before Nike, and capital Ms existed before McDonalds. It probably can't be said that the Starfleet insignia existed before Star Trek. 20:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

You are correct in the fact that they existed before, but were they owned by someone (something) before? I agree that the image in question probably didn't exist before, I can guarantee that a parabola, a circle and a skewed parabola did. The fact of the matter is that this is not the image owned by CBS, but is a skeletal representation. Venom20 20:48, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

If you draw a picture of a pikachu and call it a pookachu but it's still a yellow mouse with a lightning bolt tail, it is still copyrighted by nintendo. This is a pretty obvious copy of the star trek symbol, and thus is a copyrighted image. -Auron 01:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Pikachu is a distinctive and complex design. This is a circle with a blob in it. The issue isn't whether the image is meant to be the Starfleet insignia, but whether such a simple geometric shape can be copyrighted. 01:13, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

We aren't copyright lawyers. It is not our place to determine what is copyrightable or not. That there is any doubt should mean either we get ArenaNet's lawyers involved or take the easy path of just deleting the thing. -- Aspectacle  01:28, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, "easy path" sounds more like "lazy path" for this situation, and seems unfair to Ariyen. On the other hand, getting lawyers involved for a tiny squabble like this is kind of ridiculous.

As far as my opinion on the matter...*mumbles something about the ridiculous bureaucracy involved with copyright law* --Kyoshi (Talk) 01:52, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) My interpretation of copyright law is that the geometry of the symbol is not simple enough to apply for the "simple geometry clause". Nike swoosh is simple enough, while the macdonald's golden arches are not. Also I'll refer you to this discussion [1]. --Lania 02:00, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

In the interest of fairness, if we decide Ariyen's image is protected by copyright law, I will remove my own as well. 02:31, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Something which IMO is important in this discussion is how, despite the discussion of how a group of geometric symbols may or not be complex enough to be copyrighted by someone, Ariyen clearly made this image with the purpose of having it similar to a copyrighted image: in her talk page, the starfleet symbol is above a "Stardate" sign, hinting that the idea behind this was to be similar to the starfleet icon. IMO, if this image was made to be a derived work, we have to deal with it at least as if it were a derived work, and thus delete it. Erasculio 03:46, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Though it pains me, both images show incredible resemblence to the insignia and we cannot get away with a "I thought this art was an original concept" with two users having it up. Also, they're too obviously based on the insignia and both users acknowledged their source. Fan-made or not, the art/shape are copyrighted and thus this falls under copyvio (much like a Nike-like swoosh is copyrighted if the thickness of it is equal, against it just being a single-line swoosh). (Personally I couldn't care less about these images, as they've been around for a while.)

EDIT: That should be shapes/composition - Infinite - talk 03:50, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

The wikipedia discussion above convinces me that we will not be able to come to a conclusion about the copyright issue here. The wikipedia guys deal with that a lot more often, if they don't know, nothing short of asking a lawyer will solve the problem.

However, there is are at least 2 easy other ways out of this: Namely, everyone forgetting about this (I suspect that whoever owns the copyright will not be bothered by this talk page and never show up here), or Ariyen and Felix simply replacing the symbol with something else. I would strongly prefer the second solution. We can agree that we wont be able to figure out whether it is copyrighted or not, but even if it is not, nothing stops you from using some other image simply as a nicety towards the others users who have problems with the current one. --Xeeron 13:00, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll refer you guys to here [2]. The memory beta wiki invoked fair use for this logo. They also have a recreation of the delta badge, and they still invoked fair use [3]. While I'm not going to say that this provides irrefutable evidence on it's copyright status, since everything legal is based on opinion... I think it gives greater support for xeeron's second solution. --Lania 14:56, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd be fine with that- I'll ask Ariyen if she minds on IRC whenever she's around. 20:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Replacing image

Ariyen has conceded the image's status as a copyright violation and asked me to replace it with another image, which I will do in short order. 18:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)