东宫是什么生肖

The logo of Boeing is not considered a "work of authorship" because it only consists of text in a simple typeface, so it is not an object of copyright in respect to US law. However, this logo is still protected by trademark laws.

百度 六是坚持以督促指导为保障。

The threshold of originality is a concept in copyright law that is used to assess whether or not a particular work, or a portion of it, can be copyrighted. It is used to distinguish works that are sufficiently original to warrant copyright protection from those that are not. In this context, "originality" refers to "coming from someone as the originator/author" (insofar as it somehow reflects the author's personality), rather than "never having occurred or existed before" (which would amount to the protection of something new, as in patent protection).

For further information, see Threshold of originality on Wikipedia

Official decisions

Deutsch: Bilder, bei denen durch einen Gerichtsbeschluss oder eine vergleichbare Instanz festgestellt worden ist, dass sie wegen einer zu niedrigen Gestaltungsh?he keinen urheberrechtlichen Schutz genie?en. Siehe Sch?pfungsh?he.

English: Images judged ineligible for copyright protection by a court or similar authority. The last section contains selected images that may or may not be eligible for copyright protection.

Espa?ol: Imágenes juzgadas elegibles para la protección de los derechos de autor por un tribunal u otra autoridad similar. La última sección contiene las imágenes seleccionadas que pueden o no pueden ser elegibles para la protección de los derechos de autor.

Fran?ais : Images qui, conformément à une décision prononcée par un tribunal ou autre autorité similaire, ne peuvent pas bénéficier d'une protection par le droit d'auteur. La dernière section contient une sélection d'images qui pourraient (ou non) bénéficier d'une protection par le droit d'auteur.

Italiano: Immagini giudicate come non soggette a diritto d'autore da un tribunale o da un'autorità analoga. La sezione in fondo contiene una selezione di immagini che possono o non possono essere considerate sottoposte a diritto d'autore.

See also: Commons:Image casebook.

United States

These images are OK to upload to Commons, because they are below the threshold of originality required for copyright protection.

• 
  Bridgeman v Corel: court ruling that 2D reproductions of the original art has no valid claims for new copyrights (case description)
• 
  NFL abandoned its copyright claims on the fleur-de-lis (news report)
• 
  Best Western hotels (authority)
• 
  DUB Magazine (authority)
• 
  Nikken USA Inc. (authority)
• 
  Bruce Lee core symbol (authority)
• 
  New York Arrows logo (case report}
• 
  Car Credit City logo: Copyright office ruled this logo too simple to be protected, but a slightly more complicated version was accepted for registration (authority)
• 
  Symbols for "Myst" (authority)
• 
  Letter S (authority)
• 
  Registration was cancelled (authority)
• 
  Registration refused (authority)
• 
  Ets-Hokin v Skyy Spirits Inc
  photo is protected, but not the bottle
• 
  A plastic version lacked originality (L Batlin & Son v. Snyder)
• 
  Koosh balls; "inseparable", OddzOn Products, Inc. v. Oman (case report)
• 
  addition of shading, colors, labels to a free black and white outline map (case report)

These are  Not OK to upload to Commons (unless published under a free license by the copyright holder), because they are above the threshold of originality required for copyright protection.

• These two no soliciting signs, although arguably relatively simple, have been issued copyright registration numbers by the United States Copyright Office, which means that they have been reviewed and determined to be eligible for copyright protection. It should be noted that the copyright registration applies to the images as a whole, including their borders.
• A variant of File:CarCreditCity.png with an extra border[5]
• Disney Junior logo (VAu001043271).
• Works from other countries which are above the threshold of originality of the United States but below the threshold of originality of the source country (Hasbro Bradley, Inc. v. Sparkle Toys, Inc.)

• 
  VA0001789579 (and CC-BY 3.0)

Civil law countries

Civil law countries require a relatively high minimum level of intellectual creativity which will exclude typical signatures and simple logos from copyright protection.

If you are aware of specific caselaw or legal advice on this issue in any country, please add an entry below.

Austria

These logos are  Not OK:

• Bauer (Oberster Gerichtshof statement)
• Zimmermann Fitness (Oberster Gerichtshof statement)

Chile

The phrase "Estamos bien en el refugio los 33", a message from the Copiapó miners (penned by Jose Ojeda), was copyrighted (source).

China (PRC)

This image is  Not OK:

• 道
  (both the photo and the character
  道
  are copyrighted, see New China article)

Denmark

Not protected

• The WWF panda logo not protected by copyright (S?- og Handelsretten (The Maritime and Commercial Court) in March 1998, U 1998:946 S and NIR 69:3, p. 413-418 [2000])
  The WWF panda logo not protected by copyright (S?- og Handelsretten (The Maritime and Commercial Court) in March 1998, U 1998:946 S and NIR 69:3, p. 413-418 [2000])
• 
  Three fonts not eligible for copyright protection (Supreme Court 30 June 2006, U2006.2697H). Two other fonts were found eligible for copyright.
• 
  Sketches of windows and doors not eligible for copyright protection (The Maritime and Commercial Court 8 August 2003 (V-74-01) and 3 February 2004 (V 98/01)).

Protected

• 
  The GLOBAL knife design is copyright protected (Surpreme court 187/2008)
• A specific chair design (Tripp Trapp) (Surpreme Court 306/2009)
  A specific chair design (Tripp Trapp) (Surpreme Court 306/2009)

Finland

• 
  Simple photograph with limited copyright period – not a photographic work of art. (TN 2003:6)
• 
  Differences compared to the CoA of the historic region did not meet threshold of originality (TN 1998:5)
• 
  Technical drawing from a textbook does not demonstrate creative personal decisions to such a degree, that no one else would arrive at the same end result, when setting out to draw the same subject. (TN 2011:12)

France

Unlike the "creativity" doctrine in the US and Germany, or the "sweat of the brow" doctrine in the UK, French law asserts that a work is copyrightable when it bears the "imprint of the personality of the author." In practice, it depends on the work in question, but this has left the bar quite low for many works where an artistic intent can be shown. For an art exhibition, a man placed the word paradis with gold lettering above the bathroom door of the old dormitory of alcoholics at a psychiatric facility, and termed it artwork; the French courts agreed with him that it was copyrightable based on the aesthetic choices made ("affixing the word 'paradise' in gold with patina effect and a special graphics on dilapidated door, the lock-shaped cross, encased in a crumbling wall with peeling paint"). (Direct link to the work in question)

• Also see COM:FOP#France for TOO on buildings etc.

These are  Not OK:

• Tablecloth (TGI Paris 28 November 2008; CA Paris 7 April 2010)
• Nail clipper (TGI Paris 11 April 2011)

Germany

Not protected

• 
  BVerfG, decision of 26 January 2005, Az. 1 BvR 1571/02
• 
  Socialist Unity Party of Germany
• 
  German public broadcaster ARD

German copyright law: see also

Japan

Logos in the gallerly below are OK to upload. Article 2 of Japanese copyright law defines that a work is eligible for copyright when it is a production in which thoughts or sentiments are expressed in a creative way and which falls within the literary, scientific, artistic or musical domain. [6][7] Japanese courts have decided that to be copyrightable, a text logo needs to have artistic appearance that is worth artistic appreciation. Logos composed merely of geometric shapes and texts are also not copyrightable in general.

• 
  (DR) Letters are a means of communication, shared by anyone. Copyright protection of fonts is limited only to those that raise artistic appreciation as much as artistic works do. (Tokyo High Court 平成6(ネ)1470) [1]
• 
  (DR) Although the shape is stylized, the text is in a normal arrangement and keeps its function of being read as a sequence of letters. (Tokyo High Court 昭和55(行ケ)30, Supreme Court 昭和55(行ツ)75) [2]
• 
  The Court is negative towards recognizing the symbol as a copyrightable work of fine arts, because it is considered merely relatively simple graphic elements. (Tokyo District Court 昭39（ヨ）第5594 [3])

• Furby toy: utilitarian, so not protected by copyright as an artistic work. Not utilitarian in the United States, so photos of the toy can't be uploaded to Commons. (Sendai High Court ruling)

Norway

Not protected

Two-minute theatre play

Protected

• A specific chair design (Tripp Trapp) (Norges h?yesterett)
  A specific chair design (Tripp Trapp) (Norges h?yesterett)

Peru

The general definition of a "work" in Art. 2.17 of the 1996 law is work: any personal and original intellectual creation.

Simple photographs have a copyright term of 70 years counted from the first of January of the year following that of the taking of the photograph (Art. 144). Simple photographs are those which fail to meet the general definition of a "work".

Sweden

Not protected

• 
  Technical drawing. According to decision by the Swedish Supreme Court [4]

Protected

• 
  Mini Maglite torch (H?gsta domstolen)
• 
  Lamino chair (Eksj? tingsr?tt according to a G?teborgsposten article)
• Tripp Trapp chair (Svensk forms opinionsn?mnd according to Infotorg juridik)
  Tripp Trapp chair (Svensk forms opinionsn?mnd according to Infotorg juridik)

• Porcelain[8] ("Sundborn", made by R?rstrand)
• Photo illustrating a newspaper article[9] (removed from the website in 2004 because of copyright infringement, protected as a photographic work for 70 years p.m.a.)

Switzerland

• 1997 photo, not protected by copyright according to Swiss Supreme Court
  1997 photo, not protected by copyright according to Swiss Supreme Court

Common law countries

See also: Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag#Common law countries.

Most Common law countries use a "skill and labour" test to determine the minimum level of originality capable of attracting copyright protection, and in some countries such as the UK the required level is extremely low. Without some research into individual laws, it cannot be assumed that a text logo from a Common law country is necessarily allowed on Commons. If there is real doubt about the position a local court would take, then the image must be deleted under the precautionary principle.

If the logo is extremely simple (e.g. in a standard font), it will not be eligible for copyright even in Common law countries.

If you are aware of specific caselaw or legal advice on this issue in any country, please add an entry below.

Australia

 Not OK for most logos. The level of originality required for copyright protection in Australia is very low.

These images are eligible for copyright protection:

• Image:Flag of the Australian Aborigines.svg (fair-use on en.wikipedia.org)
  Images showing the en:Australian Aboriginal Flag have been consistently deleted from Commons (Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Flag of the Australian Aborigines.svg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Australia with Aboriginal flag replacing Union flag.svg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Austr.Aborig.png, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Black and red flag with yellow disc variations.gif), and an Australian court has ruled that it is copyrighted ([10]).

Canada

See also: en:Originality in Canadian copyright law.

OK for most logos.

Unlike other common law countries, Canada's threshold of originality veers closer to that of the United States. CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada explicitly rejected the "sweat of the brow" doctrine for being too low of a standard, but at the same time, stated that the creativity standards for originality were too high:

A creativity standard implies that something must be novel or non-obvious — concepts more properly associated with patent law than copyright law. And for these reasons, I conclude that an “original” work under the Copyright Act is one that originates from an author and is not copied from another work. That alone, however, is not sufficient to find that something is original. In addition, an original work must be the product of an author’s exercise of skill and judgment. The exercise of skill and judgment required to produce the work must not be so trivial that it could be characterized as a purely mechanical exercise."

Israel

Although Israel historically used a "skill and labour" test similar to that used by the UK, since the 1989 Israeli Supreme Court's ruling in Interlego A/S v. Exin-Lines Bros. SA they have tended fairly close to a US-style requirement equating originality with human creativity (see [11] for a 2007 paper on this shift; or see [12], which notes that "In Israel, the Supreme Court in the Interlego A/S v. Exin-Lines Bros. SA decision adopted the Feist ruling with regards to both the interpretation of the originality requirement and the general rejection of the ‘sweat of the brow’ doctrine and the labour theory as a legitimate interest for establishing a copyright claim.").

United Kingdom

OK Lego bricks (see w:Interlego v Tyco Industries)

 Not OK for most logos. The level of originality required for copyright protection in the United Kingdom is very low.

These images are eligible for copyright protection:

• File:EDGE logo.svg (uploaded as free in the US only on en.wikipedia.org)
  but: British courts have ruled it eligible for copyright protection.[13][14]
• File:Clerical Medical.png (uploaded as free in the US only on en.wikipedia.org)
  See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Clerical Medical.png.

Commons decisions

See Category:Threshold of originality related deletion requests

Logos and flags

• The logos in these images may *not* be eligible for copyright protection
• (DR) {{PD-shape}} "more than sufficient" for logo with bevels, shading, highlights, translucency and gradients
  (DR) {{PD-shape}} "more than sufficient" for logo with bevels, shading, highlights, translucency and gradients
• 
  claimed not to reach the threshold
• 
  claimed not to reach the threshold
• 
  DR
• 
  DR
• 
  (DR)
• 
  (DR) "PD text logo -- no question"
• 
  (Australian company logo DR) "PD-textlogo"
• (Flag DR) "image was made in Israel, where the flag cannot have a copyright"
  (Flag DR) "image was made in Israel, where the flag cannot have a copyright"
• 
  (Canada company logo DR) "PD-textlogo"
• 
  (DR)
• 
  (DR)
• 
  (DR)
• (DR)
  (DR)

• File:Hercules 1998 Intertitle.png originally "background isn't elaborate or eligible for any type of copyright" (decided here in 2010), deleted in 2012 as "shows artistry beyond the TOO".

Architecture

Images which have been kept because of lack of originality or de minimis:

• 
• 
• 
• File:La Defense dsc07138.jpg
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• File:Autogare de la STAO.jpg
• 

Diagrams

Diagrams which have been deemed ineligible for copyright protection:

• 
  (DR)

Photographs

Photographs which have been deemed ineligible for copyright protection:

• 
  (DR) Photograph of a three-dimensional object (drawer pull) with bevels and cast shadows

Partial copying or cropping of copyrighted works

When a file copies only part of a copyrighted work, that file's copyright status is determined only by what it has copied. If it only copied uncopyrightable elements, then the file is also uncopyrightable. In other words, we judge the copyright status of a file only by what the file itself contains, not by the status of other content the original source contained that was not copied by the file.

• 
  This image of the front cover of a novel is public domain because it only copies uncopyrightable text, copyrightable contents of the book itself or the back cover. (DR)
• This cropped portion of a copyrighted painting does not itself contain copyrightable elements.(DR)
  This cropped portion of a copyrighted painting does not itself contain copyrightable elements.(DR)

See also

• Commons:When to use the PD-scan tag - on the level of originality needed for a scan of a work to generate a copyright independent of the work
• Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag - on the level of originality needed for a photo of a work to generate a copyright independent of the work