User talk:JeroenMassar
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Please see my Wikipedia Userpage for details about me, or just check out http://unfix.org/~jeroen/ directly.
Hi; is this image really your work? It's announced as a commercial product logo?! Thanks in advance for your reply. --Eusebius (talk) 13:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, of course it is my own work, did it in Gimp 5 years ago! ;) Will be finalizing and adding it to the new IPv6Gate article on WP in a minute or so, touching up final things there. [User:JeroenMassar|JeroenMassar]] (talk)
- OK, I'm not going to nominate for deletion, your declaration is enough for me. But if you've made it, why do you say it's an existing logo? I don't understand (and couldn't find the logo on SixXS's website). --Eusebius (talk) 14:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- See http://www.sixxs.net/gfx/website.gif and the news section of the site, e.g. the one linked from IPv6Gate's Opening announcement entry and a lot of others there. It is an existing logo as it already exists for 5 years (guess it is a matter of how one states that something exists that might be confusing us here ;) JeroenMassar (talk)
- OK, so you made it for them, right? So who holds the rights? SixXS? Were you working for them? Did you concede them a right to use the picture? We still know nothing about the original rights about this image. --Eusebius (talk) 14:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Please check the SixXS About page, technically I, well together with Pim, am SixXS. Google for SixXS and my name and you will find presentations and a lot of nasty comments. I thought I tagged the picture correctly as "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following licenses" and CC-ASA. Do you want me to PGP sign a little piece of text disclosing it that way? JeroenMassar (talk) 14:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Please be sure that I'm not questionning the paternity of the file, or your good faith. I'd simply like to clarify the status of this file and make it obvious (logos are quite often subject to deletion requests). As of the license text, since it's generated by a template it's usually not considered as an explicit declaration of paternity from the uploader. I think there are two ways of clarifying things here: either by using the "source" field of the image page, and put a link pointing to a page of the SixXS website saying that this picture is available under the terms of these licenses, or by sending an OTRS authorization to Commons, from a SixXS e-mail address for instance. The second procedure is explained here. It would be kind of you to follow one of the solutions, so that it becomes very clear on the image page that everything's ok. Thanks in advance! --Eusebius (talk) 22:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- I just followed the instructions on the uploader tool, which tells me to copy that template into the description, thus I did exactly what is written there. I suggest that those instructions get amended to include your comments. Might I also note that SixXS is not a commercial entity in any way (again, see the about page). Also, sending email FROM a certain address (telnet mail 25; EHLO box.hacker.net\nMAIL FROM: president@whitehouse.gov;\n.....) really doesn't tell a thing and I am very sure any lawyer will laugh about that. If you want a declaration of any form that might even remotely be okayish then I propose that I add a nice little PGP signed text stating what it really is about, that is much more worthwhile than me having to put a special page on the SixXS website just because you want us to do that (and after that one can remove the webpage, and you are left with nothing....). I'll just add a PGP signature to the thing, that records it nicely in the description of the file, and if that doesn't make you happy, then I don't know how to handle this. JeroenMassar (talk) 11:57, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
- I think there's a little misunderstanding here: you did nothing wrong, your upload declarations are ok and valid, I don't demand that you do anything. I only make suggestions here, and I'll leave you alone now. I'm sorry if my tone or phrasing shows otherwise. You do what you want and you can leave it as it is, it's just a little more likely that you have to justify yourself again in the future. I gave you the "standard" ways of providing further info, but a little sentence of explanation in the image page may probably be enough. About your remarks, though (only generalities, nothing linked with your picture): a moral entity usually does not have to be a commercial entity to hold rights (and it's still not clear to me whether it is you personally or SixXS who holds the ones of this logo); about the e-mail address it was just a suggestion, I'm not really sure what is done by the OTRS team but I guess they keep on their servers all the meta-info of the mails they get. Electronic declarations have legal value in many countries and in the case one of them is questionned by a third party they would be able to provide valuable info to a judge, for instance. But from what I know about OTRS, it usually results in a simple invalidation of the OTRS ticket. Oh, and anyway, one's control on an e-mail address can be basically checked. So, do what seems sensible to you, and merry Christmas. --Eusebius (talk) 13:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
- I just followed the instructions on the uploader tool, which tells me to copy that template into the description, thus I did exactly what is written there. I suggest that those instructions get amended to include your comments. Might I also note that SixXS is not a commercial entity in any way (again, see the about page). Also, sending email FROM a certain address (telnet mail 25; EHLO box.hacker.net\nMAIL FROM: president@whitehouse.gov;\n.....) really doesn't tell a thing and I am very sure any lawyer will laugh about that. If you want a declaration of any form that might even remotely be okayish then I propose that I add a nice little PGP signed text stating what it really is about, that is much more worthwhile than me having to put a special page on the SixXS website just because you want us to do that (and after that one can remove the webpage, and you are left with nothing....). I'll just add a PGP signature to the thing, that records it nicely in the description of the file, and if that doesn't make you happy, then I don't know how to handle this. JeroenMassar (talk) 11:57, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
- Please be sure that I'm not questionning the paternity of the file, or your good faith. I'd simply like to clarify the status of this file and make it obvious (logos are quite often subject to deletion requests). As of the license text, since it's generated by a template it's usually not considered as an explicit declaration of paternity from the uploader. I think there are two ways of clarifying things here: either by using the "source" field of the image page, and put a link pointing to a page of the SixXS website saying that this picture is available under the terms of these licenses, or by sending an OTRS authorization to Commons, from a SixXS e-mail address for instance. The second procedure is explained here. It would be kind of you to follow one of the solutions, so that it becomes very clear on the image page that everything's ok. Thanks in advance! --Eusebius (talk) 22:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Please check the SixXS About page, technically I, well together with Pim, am SixXS. Google for SixXS and my name and you will find presentations and a lot of nasty comments. I thought I tagged the picture correctly as "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following licenses" and CC-ASA. Do you want me to PGP sign a little piece of text disclosing it that way? JeroenMassar (talk) 14:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- OK, so you made it for them, right? So who holds the rights? SixXS? Were you working for them? Did you concede them a right to use the picture? We still know nothing about the original rights about this image. --Eusebius (talk) 14:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- See http://www.sixxs.net/gfx/website.gif and the news section of the site, e.g. the one linked from IPv6Gate's Opening announcement entry and a lot of others there. It is an existing logo as it already exists for 5 years (guess it is a matter of how one states that something exists that might be confusing us here ;) JeroenMassar (talk)
- OK, I'm not going to nominate for deletion, your declaration is enough for me. But if you've made it, why do you say it's an existing logo? I don't understand (and couldn't find the logo on SixXS's website). --Eusebius (talk) 14:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
