Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:New Netherlands Seal Vector.svg

Seal of New Netherlands

 * Reason:high quality SVG with wide usage (89 pages) and high EV. It is part of the New Netherlands series infobox.
 * Articles this image appears in:all of the New Netherlands series pages, including Wall Street, Harlem, Jamaica, Queens and 85 other pages.
 * Creator:Our good friend ZooFari


 * Support as nominator --  Nezzadar   ☎   18:33, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: As this was originally used in the 1600s, it is public domain. Digitising it does not suddenly give you the copyright. This should not be promoted until the licensing is accurate. J Milburn (talk) 18:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Since copyright is not my strong suit, I nominate you to pursue this. If not, I see no reason why a digital illustration can't be owned. If I wanted to draw the Eiffel Tower, I could protect the image, so why not with a seal. I am not trying to dump my responsibilities on you, I just don't understand copyright.  Nezzadar   ☎   18:52, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've corrected the license info. Kaldari (talk) 19:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * (ec)This is a derivative work. In the US, the copyright of a derivative work is with the original copyright holder- if I take a photo of a photo you have taken, the photo I take is owned by you. An exact copy of a work in the public domain is also in the public domain, as there is no artistic input from the copier. (This is not true elsewhere, such as in the UK, where the law recognises the "sweat of the brow"- the effort people put in to creating a reproduction). J Milburn (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose. The vectorization is flawless, but the original artwork is not especially compelling. Nor does it have a high degree of encyclopedic value (I don't feel like I understand much more about New Netherlands from seeing its seal). If there were an article on the seal itself, I might support. Also, I agree that the license is bogus. "Sweat of the brow" is not valid in the United States. A slavish reproduction of a public domain drawing cannot be copyrighted in the US. Kaldari (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I think this nomination raises an interesting question. If we accept that this seal is a perfect reproduction, and has inherent value simply for being the seal, does this mean that every PD seal, logo, flag and such can also be considered a potential FP? This seal is used alongside the rather simple flag of the New Netherlands; should we also be nominating that? J Milburn (talk) 19:08, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I was trying to nominate something ZooFari had done that was of particular value, but it seems like this isn't it. Well alright then. I happen to think the seal was well done, however I am benching the subission, as there are clear issues here.  Nezzadar   ☎   20:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

~Withdrawn --  Nezzadar   ☎   20:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)