Wikipedia:Signatures of living persons

This is an essay.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcuts

This page in a nutshell: There is no consensus to reproduce signatures in Wikipedia articles, and there is some concern regarding reproducing the signatures of living persons. If the person has published their own signature, and it has been reproduced by a reliable secondary source, then reproducing the signature can be discussed on the article talkpage. If the person in question (or their representative) wants a signature removed to protect from identity theft, it should generally be removed.

There is no consensus to reproduce signatures in Wikipedia articles, and there is some concern regarding reproducing the signatures of living persons. Some believe that signatures of living persons, in general, should only be displayed in articles when a person has published their own signature, and reliable secondary sources reproduce the signature. Copyright and trademark issues may also affect the decision to include a signature. Concerns about privacy and identity theft may lead to a signature being removed upon the request of the subject.

Inclusion

Generally, there is no consensus on the reproduction of signatures of living persons in Wikipedia. If inclusion is challenged discussion on the relevant article talkpage to decide the value of reproducing a signature would be appropriate. Criteria to consider would be whether: (1) the subject has published their own signature; (2) secondary sources have reproduced the signature, with the subject's consent; (3) the image of the signature is from a reliable source, (4) the signature is directly relevant to the article in which it is displayed, and (5) the use of the signature violates any relevant laws.

Legal issues

The legal status of signatures is disputed, varies with jurisdiction, and mainly depends on whether they are copyrightable as "artistic works." Like calligraphy, they generally are in the public domain, because they consist entirely of information that is common property and contain no original authorship (see Template:PD-ineligible),^[1] but the appearance of signatures, rather than names, may sometimes be protected. Whether a signature can be considered an artistic work depends on its originality and creativity, or whether it involves "skill, judgement, and labour".^[2] Files of signatures considered ineligible for copyright both in the US and the country of the individual concerned may be tagged with {{PD-signature}}.

There are a variety of non-copyright laws which may affect the uploader and/or the Wikimedia Foundation, including personality rights^[3]^[4] and privacy rights. Work surrounding the signature might be copyrighted, using a signature could be false attribution, a signature used on product might suggest endorsement (i.e. passing off), and signatures may be trademarked.^[1] Trademarked signatures should be treated the same as trademarked logos.

Privacy

Copying a signature from a primary source may be a misuse of the source and a breach of privacy but generally is not.

Editors should provide clear justification of importance for the use of the signature of any living person where such signature is not already available in widely published sources. If a person (or a representative of) requests that their signature be removed from an article some believe that the signature should be removed and the VRT team should be notified.

References

^ ^a ^b "Signatures" (PDF). Design and Artists Copyright Society. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-02-27. Retrieved 7 July 2010. It is unlikely that, on balance, signatures could fall within the protection afforded to artistic works.
^ Spilsbury, Sallie (2000). Media Law. Cavendish Publishing. p. 439. ISBN 185941530X. An individual's signature may be protected under law as an artistic work. If so, the unauthorised reproduction of the signature will infringe copyright. The name itself will not be protected by copyright; it is the appearance of the signature which is protected.
^ Buchan, Robert; Grassie, Gill (1 May 2004). "Personality rights: a brand new species?". The Journal. Law Society of Scotland. Retrieved 7 July 2010. In the USA it is accepted that a person's name, voice and likeness are protected at law. Similarly, Canada, Germany and France also have accepted the existence of a "personality right". An individual has the exclusive right to authorise how their name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness may be used. If anyone uses the image without their consent, it is an infringement of the right and may be subject to a penalty.
^ Jaasma, Keith (Fall 2009). "Star Power in the Lone Star State: The Right of Publicity in Texas". Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal. 18 (1). The University of Texas School of Law: 123–181. the Texas Court of Appeals in Waco recognized in U.S. Life Insurance Co. v. Hamilton that the unauthorized "use of an individual's signature for business purposes unquestionably constitutes the exercise of a valuable right of property."

External links

When to use the PD-signature tag, a proposed policy on Wikimedia Commons

[dacs-1] "Signatures" (PDF). Design and Artists Copyright Society. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-02-27. Retrieved 7 July 2010. It is unlikely that, on balance, signatures could fall within the protection afforded to artistic works.

[2] Spilsbury, Sallie (2000). Media Law. Cavendish Publishing. p. 439. ISBN 185941530X. An individual's signature may be protected under law as an artistic work. If so, the unauthorised reproduction of the signature will infringe copyright. The name itself will not be protected by copyright; it is the appearance of the signature which is protected.

[3] Buchan, Robert; Grassie, Gill (1 May 2004). "Personality rights: a brand new species?". The Journal. Law Society of Scotland. Retrieved 7 July 2010. In the USA it is accepted that a person's name, voice and likeness are protected at law. Similarly, Canada, Germany and France also have accepted the existence of a "personality right". An individual has the exclusive right to authorise how their name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness may be used. If anyone uses the image without their consent, it is an infringement of the right and may be subject to a penalty.

[4] Jaasma, Keith (Fall 2009). "Star Power in the Lone Star State: The Right of Publicity in Texas". Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal. 18 (1). The University of Texas School of Law: 123–181. the Texas Court of Appeals in Waco recognized in U.S. Life Insurance Co. v. Hamilton that the unauthorized "use of an individual's signature for business purposes unquestionably constitutes the exercise of a valuable right of property."

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]