FBI Tells Wikipedia to Remove Image, Wikipedia Fights Back

August 4, 2010 By Ryan Fleming

The FBI has told Wikipedia to remove a hi-res image of its seal from the website. Wikipedia has said that there is no legal reason to, and will fight.

Taxpayers everywhere should be proud. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has taken time from its busy schedule of arresting criminals, fighting terrorism and breaking Russian spy rings to pick a bizarre, and seemingly petty fight with the user-driven encyclopedia, Wikipedia. In a letter obtained by the NY Times, the FBI has demanded the removal of a high-resolution image of the FBI’s shield from the FBI page, and is threatening legal action.

“The FBI has not authorized use of the FBI seal on Wikipedia,” the letter stated. “The inclusion of a high quality graphic of the FBI seal on Wikipedia is particularly problematic, because it facilitates both deliberate and unwitting” copying and reprinting of the FBI’s seal.

The letter also threatens Wikipedia if the website does not acquiesce.

“Failure to comply may result in further legal action. We appreciate your timely attention to this matter.”

Wikipedia replied with a letter that could almost be described as “amused”, and declared the claims to be baseless.

“While we appreciate your desire to revise the statute to reflect your expansive vision of it, the fact is that we must work with the actual language of the statute, not the aspirational version of Section 701 that you forwarded to us”. Michael Goodwin, general counsel of the Wikipedia Foundation wrote.

The code in question, section 701, specifically prohibits the manufacturing or possession of ID cards or insignias of government agencies that are used by officers or employees of that agency.

“The use of the image on Wikipedia is not for the purpose of deception or falsely to represent anyone as an agent of the federal government,” Goodwin said in the letter. “We are in contact with outside counsel in this matter, and we are prepared to argue our view in court.”

Putting aside the obvious issues of the First Amendment, it seems a somewhat ridiculous argument. If the FBI targets Wikipedia for hosting that image and plans to go after any other sites that host similar images, the Bureau has its work cut out for it. A quick Google image search of “FBI seal” netted several thousand similar results, including the easily obtained image posted above. Perhaps the FBI misread the website name and confused Wikipedia with the document leaking WikiLeaks.

If this does how manage to go to court, prepare yourselves for one of the more pointless trials in recent years.

Showing 4 comments

AbiliTV on BlogTV at 6:25pm 9th September 2010 Amazing how the FBI has any say over the Copyright of a PUBLICLY OWNED organization. Lest we forget that the US Government is only possible because WE THE PEOPLE allow them to protect the US Constitutional Rights and thus our Bill of Rights and not overstep the POWER allowed them by we the masses or better known as "WE THE PEOPLE" I wonder also why is it the copyright of BIG business (hollywood, music, and such like) warrants the protection of our FBI using our TAX money to waste on going after so called violations of copyright for the original owners NOT of the FBI's wait they make money at it. They DO NOT pay the original copyright owners any of it from what I best can find out so far. As a copyright creator on the inividual side, and as a citizen I expect that the same FBI will in deed protect my Copyrighted content the same as they do these Industries they fight so hard for... After all this is only fair. I mean why do they get more RIGHTS more PROTECTIONS... After all we are the PEOPLE right? We will step up and protest things if they get stupid... (Patriot Act, the Digital Copy Right Act... and more...) Won't we? We have yet to step up to stop these things to this date. We need to stand up with the wrongs that our government has unleashed on us... But, will it be to late when we realize... We needed to to this today, and not later.
Daniel at 2:50pm 5th August 2010 We have criminals turning the US into killing fields, out of control immigration, and a drug cartels bringing in tons of narcotics, but Wikipedia is a priority because of a logo. I can go to any field office and take a pic of one or pick up a special agents business card. DOJ, focus on things that are actually going to "serve justice", Holder, what are you doing?
NaturalTV(tm) at 8:22pm 4th August 2010 If the issue is that Wikipedia has posted a uniquely high quality, high definition version of the seal that might not generally be obtainable anywhere else and that version is of such a quality and format that facilitates a high quality counterfeit virtually undetectable from the real thing therein may lie an issue. However, probably the best way to resolve that issue, if not already done, is to high tech all those seals, both online and off with all the anti counterfeiting markings similar to money and many other items.
1. ioman at 8:33pm 4th August 2010 What does regular copyright law say about using another company's logo? I know that Microsoft is extremely strict about using their logo anywhere, whether it's on the web or not.