File talk:Admin logo.gif

GFDL compliance

I hate to point this out, but one of the fundamental rules of the GFDL is that you can't distribute anything derived from a GFDL work under a less free license. Since I believe even a simple "flipbook" animation like this most likely counts as a derived work rather than as mere aggregation, and since neither of the authors of Goldenwiki.png or Wikipe-tan mopping.png seem to have granted the Foundation an unrestricted license to their work, it would seem to me that this image is likely in violation of the GFDL.

Come to think of it, the image probably also violates Wikimedia Foundation's copyright, assuming explicit permission (as required by commons:Template:Copyright by Wikimedia) for the use of the logo in this animation has not been requested or granted. As I find it unlikely that the Foundation would suddenly decide to release the Wikipedia logo (and Admin mop.PNG specifically) under the GFDL, it seems to me that, unless explicit permission can be obtained from both the foundation and the authors of the two other original images, this image will have to be deleted as a copyright violation. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Having thought about this further, I now believe that an animation may in fact count as an aggregate, as defined in section 7 of the GFDL, of its individual frames, provided that, as required by that section, "the copyright resulting from the compilation is not used to limit the legal rights of the compilation's users beyond what the individual works permit." Thus, while I'm no longer convinced that this image necessarily constitutes an inevitable GFDL violation, I do believe that the license statement must be changed to make explicit that the different frames are licensed differently. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 13:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

...as I have now done. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)