User talk:Ghepeu/Userboxes/User OS:Gentoo

Gentoo logo
I did not use the Gentoo logo on this template when creating it, as per Wikipedia Fair use policy item #9: "Fair use images should only be used in the article namespace."

However, reading the Gentoo Name and Logo Usage Guidelines, specifically:
 * Non-Commercial Use


 * Non-commercial use of the "g" logo and Gentoo artwork is permitted provided that the following conditions are met:


 * You acknowledge that the "g" logo is a trademark of Gentoo Foundation, Inc., and that any Gentoo artwork is copyright Gentoo Foundation, Inc, and,
 * the "g" logo and Gentoo artwork are used in content that pertain to "the Gentoo project", as directed by the Gentoo Foundation, Inc., and not any effort outside or beyond the authority of the Gentoo Foundation, Inc., and
 * you clearly state that the content, project, site, product or any other type of item with which the "g" logo or Gentoo artwork is associated is not part of the Gentoo project and is not directed or managed by Gentoo Foundation, Inc.

It would seem to me that these conditions would permit the use of the logo on this template (or at least, as much as they permit its use on the main Gentoo article page) - the template clearly pertains to the Gentoo project.

The use of an authorized logo on a template is not without precedent - the Debian template, for example, uses the, since it is permitted by Debian as per :
 * Debian Open Use Logo License


 * Copyright (c) 1999 Software in the Public Interest
 * This logo or a modified version may be used by anyone to refer to the Debian project, but does not indicate endorsement by the project.

Could the Gentoo logo then be included in this template? Capi 14:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

My thoughts are this: #9 doesn't apply because Gentoo allows non-commercial use of the logo under the restrictions noted above. Number one is the only one that is tricky, except that the Image page clearly states the copyright information. The second condition is worded strangely, but it sounds like they just want to ensure you aren't using the logo to support something else, like a soup kitchen for example. And it seems to me that the wikipedia is definately not a Gentoo Foundation, Inc. project. I'm also fairly sure that no one will make an error distinguishing the two. Krakrjak 02:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm going to change to the Gentoo logo, since there hasn't been any disagreeing comment in over a month. Capi 03:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems Cyde removed the logo because it was marked as fair use. I'm not a copyright expert, but the conditions listed above don't seem to be exactly fair use. Do someone have any idea on which copyright to set on the logo? I really miss it :'( --Εξαίρετος ([[Image:Noia_64_apps_email.png|20px]]msg) 13:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Indeed, it's a shame (s)he chose to outright remove without at least saying something here. As you noted it would seem that the above conditions are not "fair use" at all - sounds more like express permition under given terms (which would apply to this userbox) to me. I am not a lawyer though, and not very familiar with the different licensing terms to change the uploaded image's license. It would be nice to have some discussion on it. Capi 13:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I reverted to the template revision using the Gentoo logo. In this template we're not asserting fair use, we're using the Gentoo logo according to the specified guidelines. This use is allowed by Gentoo Foundation and encouraged on their website (http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/graphics.xml), "Put a Powered by Gentoo image on your Gentoo powered web sites or use a Gentoo Badge on your web page, blog, forum signature or elsewhere and link back to http://www.gentoo.org - help us spread the word! Tell others how happy you are with Gentoo Linux". GhePeU 17:57, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * That's true, but the problem is that although in this template we're not asserting fair use, the uploader of Image:Glogo-small.png did: according to the rules, this prevents a user page to contain it. The only real solution would be to change the copyright tag on the image, but I don't know how to do it. --Εξαίρετος ([[Image:Noia_64_apps_email.png|20px]]msg) 07:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed the image again. The Gentoo Name and Logo Usage Guidelines imply that this permission is non-commercial only. It is certainly fair use in the article, however, fair use is not allowed on in Template: namespace. Hence, all that remains is the non-commercial-only provision (the section on commercial use clearly states Commercial use of the Gentoo "g" logo and Gentoo artwork for any other purpose is expressly denied.). Other than its use in the Gentoo article, it falls under noncommercial. Chris talk back 16:57, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The User Box is now outside the Template namespace and in my user space. As I wrote some months ago, Gentoo Foundation allows and encourages the use of their logo to advertise Gentoo (http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/graphics.xml): "Put a Powered by Gentoo image on your Gentoo powered web sites or use a Gentoo Badge on your web page, blog, forum signature or elsewhere and link back to http://www.gentoo.org - help us spread the word! Tell others how happy you are with Gentoo Linux". GhePeU 15:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Fair use is explicitly only permitted in the article namespace. As mentioned previously, taking out those fair-use applications, the image licence would be equivalent to noncommercial, which is explicitly not allowed.  Thus, Wikipedia can only use the image where it would constitute fair use.  Any other use would fall foul of either the Gentoo guidelines or Wikipedia's image use policy.  Either way, it can't be used in a userbox, no matter what namespace it's in.  Chris cheese whine 15:31, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Larry the Cow is not copyrighted or trademarked by the Foundation, and there are plenty of freely available images done by users on the web. Dirtyepic 10:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you guys serious about this? The only people who could be upset by inadequate use of the logo are the owners of the trademark. Clearly it it not the case, end of story. TheChymera (talk) 02:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)