Logo trademarked by the represented entity or its owner.

SVG content (i.e. the text underlying the image) copyright to the person creating the SVG.

I would personally take this as a) a demonstration of how to implement various things in SVG and b) a demonstration of the skills of the SVGs’ creator(s). I can’t imagine any reason I would ever need to place Meta’s logo on anything.

Caveat: I’m in the USA. Could be different elsewhere in the world.

>SVG content copyright to the person creating the SVG.

um... no. In the US, you can't take an image that I have a copyright to and turn it into an SVG and distribute it such that web browsers will render it into a facsimile of the image I own without infringing my copyright. It would be on you, not on the person viewing it.

At best you've created a derivative work that you can stop me from distributing and I'd have to make my own SVG. Of course, you wouldn't even have a license to send me a copy of your SVG, so I'd have to create my own anyway.

You intentionally overlooked the parenthetical. I didn’t say the copyright on the rendered image would go to the SVG creator. There are, I’m sure, many creative ways to specify in SVG source how an image is rendered. Those commands, tags, whatever text directs the renderer are created from a creative process. The copyright for the final SVG text is indeed held by the creator.

That does not mean the rendered image copyright is held by the SVG creator.

What does this have to do with vercel? This is just a page hosted there, not created or owned by them. Why would they own the logos?

I had the same question Jacknews, I couldnt find the person who is running this at vercel to ask this question. Maybe we should just tweet?

I don't think it is made by Vercel, they are hosting it on Vercel. There is a link to the developers Twitter and GitHub at the top of the page.

It's a website hosted by Vercel, it's not made by Vercel. As far as I can tell it's just someone's project published without much thought given to legal issues. Try contacting them maybe https://github.com/pheralb/svgl/issues

"published without much thought given to legal issues."

Indeed, with all these logos in the code/repository, I wonder how long this will last.

A collection of logos is clearly fair use. No one is purporting that these are anything other than the logo of whatever it is the logo of. Now if you started using these logos to misrepresent an affiliation or something, now that would be open you up to a civil lawsuit.

Don’t overthink this. If you needed a letter from a lawyer for every logo then Wikipedia wouldn’t have logos on every business page, and companies would often have press kits distributing high quality logos in various formats suitable for high quality replication.