5 ms·

A similar scourge of mine is Wikipedia contributors helpfully "tracing" company logos so they can be uploaded as vector graphics (great in theory!) but introduc

A similar scourge of mine is Wikipedia contributors helpfully "tracing" company logos so they can be uploaded as vector graphics (great in theory!) but introducing all kinds of mistakes in the process or using the wrong fonts... also causing the wrong logos to spread all over the internet.

dheera 3y ago
That's the punishment companies get for not providing their official logos for download in an easy format without fuss. If you have a startup, have a "media kit" page with all of this stuff. Logos for black and white backgrounds in open vector and raster formats, founder photos, bios, company intros, product photos, video clips of your product that you're okay with media cutting up and using.
- kevinmchugh 3y ago
  If you want it to be usable on Wikipedia, how do you assign the IP?
  - amenghra 3y ago
    Wikipedia lets you specify the license. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#/media/File:Tux.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#/media/File:Tux.svg has three permission details, including Creative Commons CC0 1.0.
  - someotherperson 3y ago
    A lot of companies release press kits for proper usage of their logos without necessarily transferring the IP. I imagine in a lot of cases (including Wikipedia) it falls under fair use -- ultimately the logo is still trademarked.
  - wizzwizz4 3y ago
    Release it under a CC 4.0 license. Section 2b2: > Patent and trademark rights are not licensed under this Public License.
  - brewmarche 3y ago
    IIRC a lot of logos technically don’t meet the threshold of originality so they’re not even copyrightable
    - adhesive_wombat 3y ago
      In particular, as well as the obvious "can't copyright a circle" concept, wordmarks often don't qualify for copyright. Even if the typeface is copyrighted (as many are), that doesn't transfer to writing in that typeface. As usual, exactly where and to what extent that is true can vary around the world. Trademark rules still apply, so you still can't take the Google wordmark and slap it on your company even if the logo is on Wikipedia Commons.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- drowsspa 3y ago
  Ideally, your logo in your website should also be a SVG or at least a transparent PNG. I definitely pick it up from Wikipedia when I go do a presentation if it's not there.
  - cprecioso 3y ago
    I really love a detail in Vercel’s webpage, if you right click on the logo, it offers you a link to go to the press kit page.
adhesive_wombat 3y ago
There's also nothing stopping the company itself submitting the correct logo. While, as far as I know, it's usually considered a conflict of interest to directly edit your own article as an organisation, you can upload the logo and request on the talk page of the article that correct image be used.

dheera 3y ago

That's the punishment companies get for not providing their official logos for download in an easy format without fuss. If you have a startup, have a "media kit" page with all of this stuff. Logos for black and white backgrounds in open vector and raster formats, founder photos, bios, company intros, product photos, video clips of your product that you're okay with media cutting up and using.

kevinmchugh 3y ago
If you want it to be usable on Wikipedia, how do you assign the IP?
- amenghra 3y ago
  Wikipedia lets you specify the license. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#/media/File:Tux.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#/media/File:Tux.svg has three permission details, including Creative Commons CC0 1.0.
- someotherperson 3y ago
  A lot of companies release press kits for proper usage of their logos without necessarily transferring the IP. I imagine in a lot of cases (including Wikipedia) it falls under fair use -- ultimately the logo is still trademarked.
- wizzwizz4 3y ago
  Release it under a CC 4.0 license. Section 2b2: > Patent and trademark rights are not licensed under this Public License.
- brewmarche 3y ago
  IIRC a lot of logos technically don’t meet the threshold of originality so they’re not even copyrightable
  - adhesive_wombat 3y ago
    In particular, as well as the obvious "can't copyright a circle" concept, wordmarks often don't qualify for copyright. Even if the typeface is copyrighted (as many are), that doesn't transfer to writing in that typeface. As usual, exactly where and to what extent that is true can vary around the world. Trademark rules still apply, so you still can't take the Google wordmark and slap it on your company even if the logo is on Wikipedia Commons.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
drowsspa 3y ago
Ideally, your logo in your website should also be a SVG or at least a transparent PNG. I definitely pick it up from Wikipedia when I go do a presentation if it's not there.
- cprecioso 3y ago
  I really love a detail in Vercel’s webpage, if you right click on the logo, it offers you a link to go to the press kit page.

adhesive_wombat 3y ago

There's also nothing stopping the company itself submitting the correct logo. While, as far as I know, it's usually considered a conflict of interest to directly edit your own article as an organisation, you can upload the logo and request on the talk page of the article that correct image be used.