Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wireless HDMI

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. The only deletion rationale given is CSD G12 which covers "blatant copyright infringement" which this article is not (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:21, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wireless HDMI

Declining speedy deletion since there's an active discussion, taking to AfD because the tagger deserves consideration of their point about copyright infringement. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 21:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 21:40, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 21:40, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I was able to find a couple of RS's, and a few things that point to there being a lot of sources for it. See [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5]. I'm in a rush, so I was only able to skim most of them. Thanks, Genius 101^Guestbook 21:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The original CSD tagger, Hdmi org (talk · contribs) (now indef blocked as a WP:U vio), had the following concern: "Both the text HDMI and High-Definition Multimedia Interface are copyrights of the HDMI Licensing, LLC. The term "Wireless HDMI" is a misuse and an infringement of the HDMI trademark. There is no such thing as a "Wireless HDMI" technology since HDMI Licensing, LLC. never officially released a wireless version of its technology and all current wireless solutions use proprietary 3rd party technologies (i.e. WirelessHD or WHDI) unrelated to the HDMI technology for their wireless links."

Sounds to me like his/her issue is with the people developing this technology, not with Wikipedia. I haven't checked verifiability yet, but if this does have RS coverage as Genius101 says, I say keep and let the matter be worked between the company the original tagger claims to represent and the people developing the Wireless HDMI technology. Wikipedia is not a battleground.KuyaBriBri^Talk 22:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that the first link given by Genius101 above states that Philips (Royal Philips Electronics)—which is part of the HDMI Licensing LLC consortium ([6])—introduced a wireless HDMI product in 2007. KuyaBriBri^Talk 22:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seem to be sources and the original deletion reason is totally irrelevant. That's not what we mean by WP:COPYRIGHT. DGG (talk) 02:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.