User:Stefan2/Codename Lisa's fallacies

In discussions about File:Virtualbox logo.png, User:Codename Lisa uses the following fallacious discussions:

Argument	Counter-argument
Codename Lisa claims that the licence agreement states that "This License applies to any program or other work which contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the terms of this General Public License."	It is correct that the licence applies to works containing a notice by the copyright holder saying that it may be distributed under the term of the General Public Licence. The problem is that Codename Lisa hasn't found a notice placed by the copyright holder saying that the logo may be distributed under the terms of the General Public Licence. Read further up in the text: "The majority of code in the VirtualBox Open Source Edition (OSE) is copyrighted by Oracle Corporation. [...] As a special exception to the terms and conditions of the GPL listed below, Oracle gives you explicit permission to combine its GPL code contained in VirtualBox OSE with third-party code under the aforementioned licenses." In this text, Oracle talks about "its GPL code", implying that something is distributed under the General Public Licence, without specifying what.
Codename Lisa lists a few other logos and claims that they are uploaded under the same rationale.	It is possible that some of the logos may be listed under a wrong licence claim on Commons. However, the question here is about this logo. If you download the Windows executable (generated by Oracle), the program has one icon. If you instead download Ubuntu's Virtualbox package, the program has a different icon. This implies that Oracle and Canonical don't use the same source code: at least something is different. Now look at the source code and go to the directory VirtualBox-4.2.4/src/VBox/Resources. This directory contain subdirectories named after operating systems. There are also some OSE subdirectories. In subdirectories to this directory, you find Canonical's icon. However, Oracle's icon is not to be found in this directory, unclear why. This suggests that Oracle uses some code which is not in the source package. Compare with old versions of Firefox, where the logo is separate.
Codename Lisa claims that I wrote that the logo might belong to someone other than Oracle because the "Preliminary Notes" says that some portions of Virtualbox's code belongs to other parties.	Wrong! I wrote that works copyrighted by Oracle might not be licensed under the General Public Licence. I wrote nothing about who the copyright holder is. I only wrote about licences.
Codename Lisa wrote that I wrote that the source package doesn't include the logo.	Wrong! I wrote that I couldn't find any Windows ICO file depicting the logo. I didn't write that the logo wasn't included in the package, since I might have overlooked an image somewhere in the package. It was later pointed out that there was a PNG file in the source code. I wrote that the image appears to be in some special "fair use" directory: it's unlikely that Oracle was able to publish Microsoft and Apple screenshots under the General Public Licence, and I thought that it might be possible that the whole directory was exempt from the General Public Licence for that reason. Unfortunately, those wishing to keep the image preferred not to help investigating this matter, but preferred to write page up and page down about different things which didn't tell anything about the licence for the logo. Codename Lisa has since continued to repeat the arguments which don't prove anything, but has also found the same image in a different directory, which is maybe relevant. At first, I didn't realise that the directory name was different. I'm sorry about that.