File talk:UUA Logo.svg
 | This file does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Size/Quality
[edit]
Regarding the fair-use warning. There was a fair-use rationale at the time that it was tagged as not having one, so I'm not sure why it was tagged. My guess however is that it was tagged as such because the image was too large/high quality to qualify as "low-quality" so I have shrunk the image to 1/10th it's previous size. I hope that this now satisfies the fair-use rationale. Charles (Kznf) 15:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- "This is a lossless scalable vector image." If I understand correctly, that means that changing the size doesn't change the quality. If so, then reducing the size is irrelevant for this image. I do think it's fair use, but don't think the image size/quality has anything to do with it's being fair use. It is fair use, at least on the one page, because it is the corporate logo of the subject of Unitarian Universalist Association.Aleta 01:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with you. SVGs are inherently "resolutionless" but I still think that it's better to offer them in smaller default resolutions than in larger ones. (and the previous one was 10x this size by default). This particular logo I think is comparable to the Nike symbol in that image quality or resolution are pretty meaningless terms when you're dealing with simple shapes and straight lines. I agree with you about the fair-use rationale, and am hoping that if some admin takes a look at it, they agree. Charles (Kznf) 03:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- I wasn't being critical of your reduction in the size. I agree that a smaller defaultsize is desireable. I was only saying I didn't think it had anything to do with why it's fair use. :) Aleta 21:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with you. SVGs are inherently "resolutionless" but I still think that it's better to offer them in smaller default resolutions than in larger ones. (and the previous one was 10x this size by default). This particular logo I think is comparable to the Nike symbol in that image quality or resolution are pretty meaningless terms when you're dealing with simple shapes and straight lines. I agree with you about the fair-use rationale, and am hoping that if some admin takes a look at it, they agree. Charles (Kznf) 03:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Copyright of Religious Symbols
[edit]
What laws govern the use of the Star of David or the Christian Cross in their various versions. I don't think they can be copyrighted in most cases. Why should one even need to give a fair-use rationale?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by RDates (talk • contribs).
- the preceeding comment was moved here from the main page Charles (Kznf) 13:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- in response, this particular chalice is the "corporate" logo for the UUA (the actual association itself) not a generic symbol of the religion. It's design was contracted out by the UUA to a design firm and the whole works. It's definitely copyrighted, though wikipedia certainly has a case for fair-use, which is why that case has been made on the image page. Charles (Kznf) 13:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
