Wikipedia:Logos
The first case is based on the date of first publication: if the logo was first published before 1923, it can be assumed to be public domain. First Amendment considerations override any limits on these expressive, noncommercial use of trademarks.It is recommended to identify the trademark owner in the image description. Avoid using a logo in any way that creates an impression that the purpose of its inclusion is to promote something. The logo should receive a detailed fair use rationale — the template {{Logo fur}} can help generate a detailed rationale that covers all necessary information.
These should be tagged with {{insignia}}. Special care should be taken when using the logo of an encyclopedia or other reference work in a Wikipedia article. law prohibits the reproduction of designated logos of U.S.
Use restrictions of such logos must be followed and permission obtained before use, if required. government agencies without permission.
Third, there are editorial issues about adhering to a neutral point of view and selecting an appropriate logo and representation. The encyclopedic rationale for including a logo is similar to the rationale for including portraits of a famous actor: most users feel that portraits provide valuable information about the person that is difficult to describe solely with text. Note that it is not necessary to seek formal permission from the owner in advance of using its logo, so long as the usage is fair use, does not create any impression that the logo is associated with Wikipedia or endorses either Wikipedia or the article in which the logo appears, and does not create any reasonable grounds for complaint by the owner. To the uploader: This tag is not sufficient on its own.
When a historical logo is used, the caption should indicate this, and there should be a good reason for the use of the historical logo (whether the current logo is used or not) explained in the historical logo s fair use rationale. An image copyright tag must be added to all images uploaded — for most logos, {{non-free logo}} (shown below) is appropriate.
Logos should be regarded as portraits for a given entity. law protects the right of non-owners to use trademarks for purposes of criticism and commentary.
Unlike people, however, where it is often possible to take a free photograph of that person, logos are typically protected by copyright and trademark law and so cannot be replaced by a completely free alternative. It is generally accepted that company logos may appear in the infobox of articles on commercial companies, but note that, if challenged, it is the responsibility of those who wish to include the logo to prove that its use meets Wikipedia non-free content criteria. There are three main concerns with logo use.
The second case is a logo that is simply a sequence of letters or written words: characters from a typeface are uncopyrightable in the U.S., so logos that consist purely of characters from a typeface are also uncopyrightable. You must also include the source of the work, all available copyright information, and a detailed non-free use rationale. Although most logos are non-free images and should be treated as such, there are two common cases where a logo will be copyright-free.
1987.) Similarly, the Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 does not apply to the noncommercial use of a famous mark. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc., 808 F.
First, they are usually non-free images, and so their use must conform to the guidelines for non-free content and, specifically, the non-free content criteria. 748, 762 (1976.) The only limit on this right is whether someone might think that the commentary was produced by the trademark owner.
However, this right is diluted by trademark law insofar as that author cannot present her subject in a manner that confuses or misleads the public into believing, through the use of one or more trademarks, that those organizations have produced or sponsored the work in question. (emphasis added) Girl Scouts of the United States v. 1992.) When uploading material which is subject to trademark protection, but for which the {{non-free logo}} template does not apply, please use the {{trademark}} template message: Note any appropriate image copyright tags must still be used in addition to the trademark template.
Logos that contain slogans should be omitted in favour of equivalent logos that do not. Supp.
1125(c)(4)(B). 12 (S.D.N.Y.
Usually, the current logo should be the logo presented. As well as a fair use rationale, the URL where the logo was found is useful to help verify the licensing information, copyright holder and authenticity of the logo.
propose a commercial transaction. Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. The Constitution does not, however, permit the range of the antidilution statute to encompass the unauthorized use of a trademark in a noncommercial setting such as an editorial or artistic context. (emphasis added) L.L.
While the standard for fair use remains the same as for other logos, not taking such care is more likely to introduce trademark issues. Logos for musical bands are generally not as integral to a band s image as corporate logos are for companies. The U.S.
Supreme Court has defined commercial speech as speech which .. 15 U.S.C.
v. Defaced logos or logo parodies should be used with care and not given undue prominence.
Bean, Inc. Drake Pubs., Inc., 811 F.2d 26, 31, 33 (1st Cir.
Virginia Citizens Consumer Council 425 U.S. Note a logo can still be protected by trademark law, even if it is not subject to copyright. U.S.
n author certainly would have a First Amendment right to write about the subject of the Boy Scouts and/or Girl Scouts. For example, parodies of logos may be carefully used under fair use in an article about a parody site or campaign, but should only be used in articles on the original if the parody is discussed extensively. Reasonable diligence should be taken to ensure that the logo is accurate and has a high-quality appearance.
The slogans can be described in the article s prose and/or infobox. Logos should not generally be used as icons within an article s Infobox. 1112 at 1121, n.
However, this does not affect the copyright status, because as works of the federal government, they are automatically in the public domain. Freely-licensed logos may be used, providing their inclusion enhances the article. .
For this reason, current consensus is that non-free band logos are generally not appropriate in an article about a band unless the logo itself is discussed in the prose. A logo may be placed inline with text discussing it if its inclusion meets the non-free content criteria.
Second, logos are often registered trademarks and so their use is restricted independently of copyright concerns. The Constitution is not offended when the antidilution statute is applied to prevent a defendant from using a trademark without permission in order to merchandise dissimilar products or services.
This does not mean that unnecessarily high resolution images should be used, but it does mean that resized logos should not be used if their appearance differs significantly from the original. ..
It is generally acceptable to use a logo in an article about what the logo represents (such as a company or organization), or in an article discussing the logo itself, its history and evolution, or the visual style of the logo s creator. Logos uploaded to Wikipedia must be low resolution and no larger than necessary.
Generally, logos should be used only when the logo is reasonably familiar or when the logo itself is of interest for design or artistic reasons. Logos should not be used in contexts which are, taken as a whole, strongly negative. In order to ensure that logos are appropriately displayed with an adequate level of detail, do not use a logo with smaller than 100 pixel-resolution unless there is not a larger version. U.S.
Many images of logos are used on Wikipedia and long standing consensus is that it is acceptable for Wikipedia to use logos belonging to others for encyclopedic purposes.
