Template:Did you know nominations/Google Android lawn statues
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Allen3 talk 22:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Google Android lawn statues
[edit]- ... that Google keeps giant dessert items on its lawn?
- Comment: just moved out of userspace and into main space. i will be reviewing another article shortly.
Created/expanded by Found5dollar (talk). Self nom at 20:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- I just reviewed Peter pepper at aprilfools DYK. [1]--Found5dollar (talk) 20:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- No, the picture cannot be used as it is not a free image since it primarily depicts three-dimensional public artwork subject to copyright, thus not coming under freedom of panorama in the United States. In fact, it will have to be removed from Commons for that reason and hosted here with {{non-free 3D art}} and a fair use rationale for its (otherwise permissible) use in the article. Daniel Case (talk) 18:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- I beg to differ about the image as these objects are primarily advertizing and way marking structures and not artwork. Pictures of companies signs at the front of their buildings are fine to have on commons and these serve the same purpose. I have looked far and wide for a copyright notice or date and I can't find one. Neither Themendous, the company that created the statues, or Google seem to claim copyright on them. --Found5dollar (talk) 23:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- Copyright attaches automatically to current works; neither Google nor the creators have to do anything to claim it (actually, as Google probably commissioned the statues, they own the copyrights as works for hire. Therefore the absence of a copyright notice is irrelevant as one is not needed. Nor does it matter what they use them for.
I do realize that Google allows the Android logo to be used under CC-BY, and bully for them for doing that, so the sculpture of it is probably OK, but if the same license attaches to the other sculptures Google would have to explicitly say so somewhere for us to be able to use it under our policies. Daniel Case (talk) 02:33, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
- Addendum: For further clarification, see the Commons summary of freedom of panorama in the US: "For artworks, even if permanently installed in public places, the U.S. copyright law has no similar exception, and any publication of an image of a copyrighted artwork thus is subject to the approval of the copyright holder of the artwork." Daniel Case (talk) 02:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
- I have moved the picture here (at reduced resolution, per WP:NFCC) and removed it from this nomination. Daniel Case (talk) 04:17, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
- No, the picture cannot be used as it is not a free image since it primarily depicts three-dimensional public artwork subject to copyright, thus not coming under freedom of panorama in the United States. In fact, it will have to be removed from Commons for that reason and hosted here with {{non-free 3D art}} and a fair use rationale for its (otherwise permissible) use in the article. Daniel Case (talk) 18:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC)