Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bottle of Duff.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
While the beer bottle is utilitarian, the label is not, and thus I believe this is a copyvio. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:25, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Keep ...and these? --RanZag (talk) 13:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Then delete them all. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
- Keep, I am the creator. --Vale maio (talk) 20:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
- Keep I agree with RanZeg, if normal beer bottles (which have copyrighted logos and labels on them) stay then this is no difference. SuperFlash101 (talk) 18:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
- Keep idiotic deletion request. Deletion of all beer bottle images is ridiculous. Did this certain admin ever hear something about de minimis??? I guess not.19:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'm perfectly aware of de minimis, but I believe that this fails de minimis because the image is of a bottle of duff, and so if the label was removed it would no longer be useful as a bottle of duff. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
- Keep Personally, I think it's too simple for copyright anyway. It's just a little text and basic shapes. According to en:Duff Beer, Matt Groening has never licensed the trademark for actual beer (which he's against), but in Mexico (where this comes from) someone else owns the trademark. This is a legal product that doesn't need any permission from Groening/Fox. Unlike trademark, copyright is international. Copyright defenses work way better over borders, yet you'll see that it never even comes up even though the design is practically the same. Now, this on the other hand, is a different story. Rocket000 (talk) 06:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
