This file is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
File:Notre Dame coat of arms.png is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Heraldry and vexillologyWikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyTemplate:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyheraldry and vexillology articles
This file is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
This file is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles
"The copyright on those works was not renewed and has subsequently expired, but the image's use as a trademark is still protected."
Doesn't that mean that the image can't be in the public domain, which therefore means it's tagged incorrectly? Esrever 04:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. Let's add the Trademark template. As you can see, though, several works not copyrighted, such as Coca-Cola's logo, use the PD template (to show no copyright problems) and also the Trademark template (to warn others not to misuse).Pmadrid 04:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Esrever, I completely agree with your argument regarding whether an image which, while not under copyright, is not completely free (libre) and therefore is not technically in the public domain.
However, the tags used in Wikipedia for public domain don't actually mean "public domain." They mean "free from copyright." This is most plainly seen in the text of the template itself, which requires one to list a fair use rationale. You don't need a fair use rationale if something is not protected under copyright, even if it might be protected under trademark.
This image is free from copyright and thus can be copied as long as it's not used as a trademark.
If you really want to be technically correct about this, I suggest changing the not-free-image template to less of a copyright bias. For example, remove the "needs a fair-use rationale" part. Perhaps also you could make a new template for "not protected by copyright." I would be totally ok using one of those labeling schemes. Until then, I think we should stick with the combo of PD-US and trademark to avoid accidental deletion because of the absence of a fair use rationale that does not need to be there. Pmadrid 14:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=small}
