Misplaced Pages

:Featured list candidates/Starfleet ranks and insignia: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Featured list candidates Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:39, 25 March 2006 editZscout370 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users59,497 edits →[]← Previous edit Revision as of 22:09, 25 March 2006 edit undoAKMask (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers4,957 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 21: Line 21:
*'''Oppose''' for copyright, odd organizations, and a very messy reference section. ] 07:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC) *'''Oppose''' for copyright, odd organizations, and a very messy reference section. ] 07:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
*As the artist of some of these images in question, I mainly drew the images using Microsoft Paint based on the illustrations previously uploaded onto Misplaced Pages. The PD Paramount thing was not my idea, but I have seen no proof about images being released like that. Some of the images are released under PD-user|me, since I drew them. If the consensus is that the images cannot be just redrawn and retagged, then go ahead and re-tag them as such (most are at the Commons now). But, are you sure this image is for decoration, since we are showing comparisons between the different ranks from the different series. Regardless of how the situation turns out, I do not have a vested interest in this article passing FLC or nor I will step in it's way to reach that point. Any more questions can be directed to me. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 21:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC) *As the artist of some of these images in question, I mainly drew the images using Microsoft Paint based on the illustrations previously uploaded onto Misplaced Pages. The PD Paramount thing was not my idea, but I have seen no proof about images being released like that. Some of the images are released under PD-user|me, since I drew them. If the consensus is that the images cannot be just redrawn and retagged, then go ahead and re-tag them as such (most are at the Commons now). But, are you sure this image is for decoration, since we are showing comparisons between the different ranks from the different series. Regardless of how the situation turns out, I do not have a vested interest in this article passing FLC or nor I will step in it's way to reach that point. Any more questions can be directed to me. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 21:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
:*It's more then just concensus, it's copyright law. When an image is copyrighted, they are not copyrighting specifically THAT IMAGE, although that image is copyrighted, they are copyrighting any other depictions of that image. Googles copyright is not on just the jpg on their homepage, but on all depictions of the word Google with a blue G, red O... et cetera. In fact, I'd be surprised if the color order itself wasn't copyrighted. Amazon get's a lot of flax for how many things they patent/trademark/copyright. The amazon.com logo contains a non-circular period (it's oval), which they copyrighted. They have successfully sued other web sites that created logos that had ovoid periods in the logo. Also, the main part of the rank insignias is the original USS Enterprise triangular-thingymabobber. I know for a fact Paramount has that under some damn strong copyright protection. Not in any way whatsoever public domain. It may become PD slightly sooner then mickey mouse will, but it'll be by about 2 minutes, and occur several million years after humans have vanished as a species. -''']</font>'''<sup>]</font></sup> ]

Revision as of 22:09, 25 March 2006

Starfleet ranks and insignia

I say this is an excelent ex-article. It was broken apart big time and downgraded into a list as article was getting colosal. I helped create this article and feel it would be a fine featured list. --Cool Cat 18:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Support, well referenced, great lead, nice pictures. Phoenix2 01:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I have two words: image copyrights. Some are claimed as public domain as self made, others say Paramount released it to PD (proof?), others say fair use (cannot be used for decorations and in any way needs rationalles). In one word: mess. Renata 02:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
    Not really most of the images were drawn by wikipedia editors such as myself. All you need is paint for a large number of the images. Infact most are on commons.wiki.
    I do not know if paramount released them to pd or not (not that it matters), but I do know images I and others created were released to the public domain. Some images on the page were coppied from websites as a free alternative for now is not avalible for some ranks such as the alternate universe insignias. I am not that skilled as a creator even though the designs aren't complex so if anyone willing to redraw those, I have no objections.
    --Cool Cat 14:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
    It does matter if Paramount released it because, for example, Image:Star Trek The Next Generation, Alternate OF 9.gif claims that. And simply redrawing does not solve copyright issues. Imagine, I redraw Microsoft logo and use it on my own software. I will be jailed in no time. So redrawing is very much the same as simply copying. Renata 14:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
    Why are you pulling my leg? So if I take a picture of Jean-Luc Picard (patric Stewart) off screen in star trek uniform I am violating copyrights?
    You can buy the pins and take the photo. Or you can use paint to draw the images.
    The only issue here can be trademark, not copyright. Otherwise we will need to delete every image with a yellow circle on it as paramount owns the copyrights. This has been discussed to death and I am tried of explaining myself. have a read of m:copyright paranoia --Cool Cat 17:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
    My whole point is that you need to fix and clean up the copyright status. Simply saying "oh, I can redraw them" does not fix anything. Renata 03:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
    Sorry I'll have to ignore your comment which seems to complain about copyright of images I and fellow wikipedians have created. They are released to PD and moved to commons. Nothing you say will change that.
    Now if you'd like to help with the rest of the images left on en.wiki by creating alternatives under a free license, be my guest. If not you made your point.
    --Cool Cat 03:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
  • On a Star Trek kick today, I guess. Oppose. Fair use only extends to a point, and a reproduction, even by hand, of a copyrighted work still violates copyright. -M 03:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Copyright concerns are legitimate. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 14:44, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Nominator appears to misunderstand trademark and copyright. Suggest the nominator obtain reprint permission from Paramount, then resubmit. Durova 14:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose for copyright, odd organizations, and a very messy reference section. Staxringold 07:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
  • As the artist of some of these images in question, I mainly drew the images using Microsoft Paint based on the illustrations previously uploaded onto Misplaced Pages. The PD Paramount thing was not my idea, but I have seen no proof about images being released like that. Some of the images are released under PD-user|me, since I drew them. If the consensus is that the images cannot be just redrawn and retagged, then go ahead and re-tag them as such (most are at the Commons now). But, are you sure this image is for decoration, since we are showing comparisons between the different ranks from the different series. Regardless of how the situation turns out, I do not have a vested interest in this article passing FLC or nor I will step in it's way to reach that point. Any more questions can be directed to me. User:Zscout370 21:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
  • It's more then just concensus, it's copyright law. When an image is copyrighted, they are not copyrighting specifically THAT IMAGE, although that image is copyrighted, they are copyrighting any other depictions of that image. Googles copyright is not on just the jpg on their homepage, but on all depictions of the word Google with a blue G, red O... et cetera. In fact, I'd be surprised if the color order itself wasn't copyrighted. Amazon get's a lot of flax for how many things they patent/trademark/copyright. The amazon.com logo contains a non-circular period (it's oval), which they copyrighted. They have successfully sued other web sites that created logos that had ovoid periods in the logo. Also, the main part of the rank insignias is the original USS Enterprise triangular-thingymabobber. I know for a fact Paramount has that under some damn strong copyright protection. Not in any way whatsoever public domain. It may become PD slightly sooner then mickey mouse will, but it'll be by about 2 minutes, and occur several million years after humans have vanished as a species. -M