Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 June 12

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: keep. Retain as a non-free image. MBisanz ^talk 20:26, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:American Airlines logo 2013.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by AxG (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Logo is in public domain as stated in article due to it not meeting threshold of originality. This was officially stated by US Copyright Office here. 𝕒𝕥𝕠𝕞𝕚𝕔𝕕𝕣𝕒𝕘𝕠𝕟𝟙𝟛𝟞 🗨️ 🖊️ 03:22, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and attached US Copyright Office decision.--Vulphere 05:19, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• @Jo-Jo Eumerus: I am requesting to relicense and move to Commons. I actually don’t know, does this require discussion if there’s already proof? --𝕒𝕥𝕠𝕞𝕚𝕔𝕕𝕣𝕒𝕘𝕠𝕟𝟙𝟛𝟞 🗨️ 🖊️ 21:16, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, the Commons file was deleted due to another decision and the !vote here wasn't clear on what it wanted to accomplish, so a clarification was needed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:35, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as non-free. For bacground, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:American Airlines logo 2013.svg. The US Copyright Office's new letter was quite clear about the fact that it did not think of a low and high resolution version of the logo as two separate images. Instead, they really changed their mind and decided that the logo is a work afterall. But the letter also goes on to identify the elements that make it a work, and stating that "the resulting protection is thin, protecting only the Work’s original and creative elements 'against only virtually identical copying.'" This makes me conclude that it's possible to create a near-identical version at one's leisure by removing those elements (and we've done something like that, e.g. File:InfoboxHez.PNG). I don't, however, want to say that this possibility makes the non-free logo fail WP:NFCC#1; such a near-identical version might not be a a "free equivalent", because it's not authentic. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:28, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as non-free per Finnusertop and the Copyright Office's latest letter (dated December 2018). The reasons this image meets TOO start at the bottom of page 5 (starting with "Upon careful re-evaluation of the record as a whole"). Wikiacc (¶) 00:53, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.