Wikipedia:Media copyright questions

Media copyright questions
Welcome to the Media Copyright Questions page, a place for help with image copyrights, tagging, non-free content, and related questions. For all other questions please see Wikipedia:Questions. How to add a copyright tag to an existing image On the description page of the image (the one whose name starts File:), click Edit this page. From the page Wikipedia:File copyright tags, choose the appropriate tag: For work you created yourself, use one of the ones listed under the heading "For image creators". For a work downloaded from the internet, please understand that the vast majority of images from the internet are not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. Exceptions include images from flickr that have an acceptable license, images that are in the public domain because of their age or because they were created by the United States federal government, or images used under a claim of fair use. If you do not know what you are doing, please post a link to the image here and ask BEFORE uploading it. For an image created by someone else who has licensed their image under an acceptable Creative Commons or other free license, or has released their image into the public domain, this permission must be documented. Please see Requesting copyright permission for more information. Type the name of the tag (e.g.; {{Cc-by-4.0}}), not forgetting {{ before and }} after, in the edit box on the image's description page. Remove any existing tag complaining that the image has no tag (for example, {{untagged}}) Hit Publish changes. If you still have questions, go on to "How to ask a question" below. How to ask a question To ask a new question hit the "Click here to start a new discussion" link below. Please sign your question by typing ~~~~ at the end. Check this page for updates, or request to be notified on your talk page. Don't include your email address, for your own privacy. We will respond here and cannot respond by email. Note for those replying to posted questions If a question clearly does not belong on this page, reply to it using the template {{mcq-wrong}} and, if possible, leave a note on the poster's talk page. For copyright issues relevant to Commons where questions arising cannot be answered locally, questions may be directed to Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright.
Click here to start a new discussion

(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 14 days are automatically archived to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

content i added Bradford Mutual Sunday School League

why would i need to copyright the information if i wrote it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deano001 (talk • contribs) 2006 December 20 13:06 UTC.

Image:100 1147.jpg

Copyright tag has been added to the above image previous comments by Trueblood786 on 18:17, January 7, 2007

Not Apdex and looks dubious

I wish to add a free to use copyright tag to Image:ARRSE Stool Chart.png but don't know what code to add.

Could you help me please?

Thanks

See the following page for free licenses: Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Free licenses. May I suggest {{GFDL-self}}. To insert this license, just copy/paste the preceding code into the image page.--NMajdan•talk 20:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Map of the Longleaf Pine Belt

I made the article, and added this picture Image:Pine_Belt.jpg.

I got a message saying the licensing was bad. I changed it. Could someone tell me if it is sufficient?

How do I make my image on the G&L in accordance with your policy? I took the picture and will share it if source is included. What do you recommend?

Dillivered

No, and you were notified earlier that there wasn't a source. You've provided a source, so removing the no source was fine. After adding and removing the PD-USGov tag (which would have been wrong), this image is without a license. The source website states "© 2004 The University of Mississippi English Department." Therefore, we can only use it under fair use, which then you would need to attempt to explain why this image is critical to the article and why it couldn't be recreated. This latter part would be the difficult case for you to make, as it's possible to get a free image or draw one sufficient for the article. But I'm also guessing that this isn't doesn't show anything specific that couldn't be recreated or is unique in some other way. I have added the no license tag, which you may remove if you provide a license. --MECU≈talk 20:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:BailonA.jpg and Image:KielyW.jpg

I am not sure what is wrong with it but I got notified. --Shaericell (Userpage|Talk|E-mail|Triplets) 03:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. These images are copyrighted, and in order to use them on Wikipedia, they must comply with our fair use policy. Part of that is that the uploader must explain why these images are not replaceable, meaning why a free image couldn't be used for the same purpose. These images appear to just depict the subject of the article they are used in for which any free image could do the same thing, thus myself and another user have marked them as replaceable fair use. If you want to dispute this tag, you need to follow the instructions in the red box and explain why they are not replaceable. Also, do not remove tags like this, especially without some kind of explanation of why you are doing this, and especially since the red box says you, the uploader, should not and to dispute the tag by following the step(s) outlined in the box. --MECU≈talk 20:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

I want to add this picture off the Steeler's website, but unfortunately I am being told I am incorrectly adding the picture with the copyright. So manybe someone could tell me how to go through with this process and I'll glady comply. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stillers36 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

What license for Image:Hofmeyr Skull.jpg?

I uploaded Image:Hofmeyr Skull.jpg. I found it here: [http://www.eurekalert.org/multimedia/pub/2854.php]. The page says :

Usage Restrictions: None

I'm not sure what license that would translate to. Please will a license expert help me decide if this can be on Wikipedia, and under what license. Gary van der Merwe ^(Talk) 10:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Since the site explicitly states that there are no restrictions on using the image, it appears appropriate for use on Wikipedia. I would recommend adding {{no rights reserved}}. ShadowHalo 10:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Gary van der Merwe ^(Talk) 11:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Image of my popcorn maker

I took a photo of my popcorn maker this morning, because I thought it might be appropriate for the "popcorn" article. I have also discovered that there is an article called "Popcorn maker". I took the photo so that it could be used on Wikipedia; I don't want to keep the copyright myself. However, the licensing tags are very confusing, and I did not select any. I have now received an automated notice on my discussion page, telling me that I need to add a tag. Can somebody help, please? In particular I'm confused by the difference between "free licenses" and "public domain", which I found on one of the links in the automated notice. The image is called Image:Popcornmaker.jpg. I have not yet attempted to add it to the article(s). I have a lot of other images that I'd like to give to Wikipedia, but I want to make sure I'm doing it properly. Thank you. ElinorD 23:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

With a free license you retain the copyright but allow its use by others with a relatively minimal set of restrictions. In that case you should select a license and apply the relevant template. Please reply here and let us know the kind of rights you're willing to license if that's what you'd like to do, and we can help you pick one. Public domain means that you give up your copyright. If that's what you want to do, just add {{PD-self}}. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I have released it into the public domain, using the tag that you suggested. ElinorD 00:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, you can upload photographs that you take yourself to Wikimedia Commons, which allows all of our different projects (Wikipedia in different languages, for instance) to use the image. Jkelly 01:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take a look. ElinorD 01:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Uploading images

I want to know how to upload images from websites without them being deleted, how can I do that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Support wikipedia (talk • contribs) 00:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

Either obtain permission from the copyright holder to release the image under a free license, or use the image under fair use. Permission "for Wikipedia only" or for non-commercial or educational use restrictions is not acceptable.

See WP:COPYREQ for directions on how to obtain permission and what to do afterward, and WP:FAIR for the fair use policy. In either case the image must be correctly tagged, and if fair use is claimed valid rationale must be added manually, by you, to the image description. The image source must be provided as well. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Image Upload of Black_Seahorse_jpg (No Copyright)

I just joined Wikipedia as a new user today. I have been directed to this website many times in my research of WWII Marine Bombing Squadron VMB-611, of which my father was a PBJ pilot and went MIA in 1945. My thoughts and goal is to create an article on VMB-611 history, but I have a lot to learn to post it here. In respect to my uploading the above jpg file, Black Seahorse 1 jpg, it was something I just tried and now I have been notified of no copyright tag. I have to learn, but I have numerous items of memorabilia, including photos, that I have on personal file. These items are not copyrighted, nor are not "public domain" as they date back to over 60 years and are private collections. So, if I want to upload any of these items (that mostly are scanned from original documents or photos), what do I need to do to satisfy Wikipedia requirements, yet share to its users what I want to share with them? SeahorseBlue 04:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)SeahorseBlue

This is the image in question: Image:Black Seahorse 1.jpg

The purpose of Wikipedia is to provide a free-content encyclopedia that can be used by anyone for any purpose, including commercial. We therefore require all content be public domain or licensed in such a way as to permit free use. See copyleft.

Be aware that issues of copyright is not connected with physical possession of a creative work. If the work was published before 1978 but no copyright notice was ever affixed and no copyright was registered, then it's public domain whether the physical object you scanned to produce the image file is privately owned or not.[1] Unpublished work is a different kettle of fish. Under pre-1978 law, unpublished work was subject to perpetual common law protection. That is not now the case, but none of the existing copyrights on unpublished material have yet expired under the current law.

You therefore cannot assume you own the copyright together with the photographs. This would be retained by the photographer. However, as historical photographs they might be usable under fair use. See WP:FAIR for Wikipedia policy on this. However, even if copyrights were not mentioned in whatever arrangement by which you came into possession of the photographs, then you may well own them depending on inheritance laws in your state.

For the image you're specifically asking about, if this was as described an insignia actually used by the Marine Bombing Squadron VMB-611 then it's public domain as a work of the US Government. Otherwise, the copyright issues I mention above apply.

A "copyright tag" is a Wikipedia template added to the image description specifying its copyright status or license. You can find a list of image copyright tags here: WP:ICT. You add a tag by going to the image page and clicking the "edit" link. This will edit the image description. Remove the {{untagged}} template and insert the correct one. For public domain works of the US Government that would be {{PD-USGov}}. Otherwise, select one of the free licenses and apply that, or a fair use tag along with rationale.

You can tag an image automatically when you upload it by selecting a tag from the pulldown menu on the upload page where it says "Licensing". If you don't do it then, you have to add it manually as I describe. TCC (talk) (contribs) 06:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Help finding the right copyright and fair use template for a photo of a dead person

I uploaded Image:Gil_Elvgren.jpg recently, and tried to follow the fair use and copyright policies. I found the picture at The Pin-Up Files Elvgren Page, and enhanced it a bit to use in a WIP biography article which I'm writing while I learn on how to write for Wikipedia. The image is of dubious source, copyright is not specified, but I think Wikipedia could use it in the biography of this person under fair use. I think I placed the fair use rationale and copyright tag appropiately, but a bot left me a message saying that I should indicate its copyright. I'm really new and just learning, and after re-reading the fair use and copyright pages, and reviewed again the fair use tags, I'm lost. Could anyone explain me, first what I did wrong, and second, which are the right tags I should use for this image? TIA. --Pi 09:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

The copyright tag and rationale are ok (though it would be best to also mention that the subject is dead, and not available for future photographs) except for the fact that we do not know who owns the photograph. Without that information, using the photo violates Wikipedia policy and is pretty shaky legally. For example, how can we estimate the effect our use will have on the work's value to its owner, if we don't know who that it and how they've published it? If you merely want to show what Elvgren looked like, I suggest finding another image. ×Meegs 13:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Deveshwar.jpg

Hi.I took the above image from the online version of a newspaper. Under what category do I tag it and how do I find out its copyright status?Shreyas310 11:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shreyas310 (talk • contribs) 11:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC).

It would be helpful if you could tell us which newspaper the image came from, and its article's URL. The photo could be owned by the paper, a new agency, a freelance photographer, the subject, or someone else. Unless we can figure that out and demonstrate that the photo is in the public domain or available under a free license compatible with Wikipedia (such as the GFDL), we can not use the image. If that's the case, we will need to either request that an existing photo's copyright holder agree to a free license, or we will need a contributor to take their own photograph of Y C Deveshwar. ×Meegs 13:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

DVD covers etc

Should such things as DVD covers, CD covers etc still state the source and a fair use rationale in each case. It does say this on the Template:DVDcover tag. I noticed several images uploaded by User:Vintagekits where he has failed to include the source or a rationale and flagged this up. However he was deleted the warnings and stated he doesn't need a source or rationale for such images. See for example Image:Steve Collins.jpg Astrotrain 12:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

A few things. First, regarding sources for covers, all that is needed is the name of the product and its copyright holder/publisher (who digitized the image, or hosted it on their web site is not relevant its copyright). That said, it is no harder to add this info than it is for us to delete the image, so covers should not be tagged {{no source}}; the info is trivial to find, so worst come to worst, we can always add it later. Second, covers without rationales are largely tolerated when they are used in articles about the product itself, as most of the major points are hit in the templates. A rationale specific to the particular article is advisable, though. Third, covers should only be used as a part of critical commentary about the product itself. It's not necessary for the entire article to be about the product, but the DVD that you linked is not even mentioned in the article. ×Meegs 13:13, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

OK thanks for the response. Perhaps the tags should be updated as they contradict this position. I guess these images should be removed from the said articles then given they are not about the DVD or CD in question? Astrotrain 13:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thats not what he said Astrotrain--Vintagekits 13:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

PUBLISHING Newsroom on Access SF page

I have added the copyright and image tag. I want to know how to publish my page so that everyone can look it up on Wikipedia. Right now, its not published yet.

I've read through many of your help pages but dont get a straight answer about publishing. Please just tell me how and I will do it.

Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Newsroom (talk • contribs) 22:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC).

/* Licensing -- permission granted for wikipedia only

Could someone check my tagging on Image:LENE2.jpg and amend it to something more appropiate if needed.

Thanks

joly

Wwwhatsup 22:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I have fixed the template. We don't accept "for Wikipedia only" media. The image will have to be deleted, unfortunately. Jkelly 22:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use SVG images

I don't know if this has been discussed before, but is it possible to use SVG images under fair use? #3 of the fair use criteria says that the image should be low resolution, but shrinking the size of an SVG doesn't appear to actually change detail of the image since, according to Scalable Vector Graphics, "the vector image can be scaled continuously". So doesn't this mean that no matter the resolution, an SVG is inappropriate for fair use? ShadowHalo 08:36, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

generaly it is consider better to use raster format fair use images.Geni 09:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

So then should {{ShouldBePNG}} be used in place of {{BadJPEG}} when it comes to fair use images then? ShadowHalo 10:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Is a screen capture made from a tv broadcast copyrighted?

I have a photo posted that is a screen grab I made from something that was broadcast on television. It is of the person the page is about. While there are photographs of him available on the internet, they are copyrighted by the photographer or publication, so I did not use one of those. I felt that 'fair use' would cover the screen capture, but if I must request permission from his employer (the network) I will. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CLDelmar (talk • contribs) 08:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

Yes, it is copyrighted. If you take a look at {{tv-screenshot}}, it states that "the copyright for it is most likely owned by the company or corporation that produced it". I'm assuming you're referring to Image:MickWare.jpg, in which case a fair use image would not be appropriate since it would be possible to create a free image since he's a living person (see #1 at WP:FUC for more information). If you do decide to contact CNN, consider adapting one of the example requests at Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. ShadowHalo 09:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

How do you remove copyright flags made by a malicious user?

An image, which I own and created was accused of being stolen by the user Riurik. How do I stop a malicious user from flagging every single one of my pictures and wikipedia edits?

The source is from a website I also own: http://www.lvivlviv.com/pics/neo-nazis/neo-nazi-symbology/neo-nazi-symbology.jpg

I added a CC 2.5 tag with attribution with an explanation that I own/created the image. Is this enough to remove the flag?

Thanks, Graham Wellington 18:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

You need to send an email to permissions@wikimedia.org with a list of the images and the lisence(s) you are releaseing them under.Geni 18:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Have you written the user on his talk page to ask why he did that? Unless you have had repeated problems with this user in the past, please assume good faith and allow that it may have been a simple error. In fairness, this is almost always the correct action for an image sourced from a website. The vast majority of such images uploaded to Wikipedia are not owned by the uploaders and are actually copyright violations. This is usually the case even if they carry a copyright tag. The uploaders simply lie about it. That's not true in your case, but Riurik would have had no way to know that.

However, even though you own the image you should not have removed the copyvio tag, so I'll be replacing it. Once the process has been initiated it's best to let it complete. Go to WP:CP and find the listing for your image, then edit that page and add your information you gave here immediately below the listing. Any proof you can supply that you own the source website, such as a WHOIS listing for the domain, would be helpful. Then when one of the admins goes through the list to close it out, your image will be treated appropriately. Don't simply remove the listing yourself; it would look like vandalism. (Although in a civil discussion you might be able to convince Riurik to remove it.)

Emailing permissions@wikimedia.org is not strictly necessary for images you own. It's mainly for giving notice of permission from non-Wikipedian copyright holders. It would look odd to remove the

If and only if this is a user with whom you have had repeated problems of this nature, then this can be considered harassment or vandalism. In that case, contact an administrator or make a report on the appropriate notice board. TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, now that I look at the image description history, I see that an admin has some along and resolved the problem. So don't worry about some of I said earlier, except that for problems of this nature in the future, discussion with the user who added the tag might be fruitful. TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Suspicions about licensing on a photo

Image:John Ogonowski.jpg has been labeled GFDL by the uploader. But the photo appears to have been taken from the web (the photo obviously looks like a retaken photo of an old, slightly crumpled photo, and a google image search for "John Ogonowski" shows the image on many sites - the only places that attribute give credit to AP). It should probably be a copyrighted fair use tag. What's the process for dealing with something like this? Thanks -- Siobhan Hansa 00:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It's obviously not an AP photo unless they've suddenly gotten into the portrait business. Here [2] it says "Photo: AP", but the text says it was provided by his family. Perhaps the AP reproduced the photo and made it available to the press. If the family was free to make the photo available and the AP was free to distribute it, then it's probably copyrighted to the family. It seems then to be eligible for a fair use tag with appropriate rationale. Feel free to fix it yourself, or bring it to the attention of the uploader. TCC (talk) (contribs) 04:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer. I wasn't sure about going in and editing licensing tags on a photo I hadn't uploaded. Seemed like the sort of thing that might not be appreciated. I'll start by talking to the uploader, but it's good to know I can just make the change if necessary. -- Siobhan Hansa 22:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I created my image, and want to copyright it

I created 2 images and want to copyright them, but do't know what licence to use. Also, how do you delete a picture? Image:GRAM_Logo.gif Image:Rumor_Productions_Logo.gif —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ryan Keyes (talk • contribs) 02:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

To delete a file you uploaded yourself and has not been extensively edited by anyone else, add the template {{db-author}} to the image description. An admin will notice it before long and delete it.

As for licensing, that depends on what use by others you want to allow. What would that be?

But do you really own the copyrights here? These appear to be logos. If you don't already own the copyrights on the designs, then you cannot claim copyright them. TCC (talk) (contribs) 04:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Canadian Atlas Map from 1497 to 1905, provided by government agency NRCan

Image:Canada,_Routes_of_Explorers,1497_to_1905.jpg Need a little help on this license. NRCan says it free to use, but that if you are using for commercial purposes you should contact them for the most up to date version? (I believe if you look at most free pictured republished and provided by the government that is the standard procedure to ensure accuracy. The image is free for personal use. Hence I made my own version of this file and have decided to release the modified version under GFDL. (see what files link here in the image link afformentioned). Thank you! --CyclePat 05:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It depends when the map was made however the terms they put on it will also apply to derivative works.Geni 14:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It appears that the only modification you made to this map was to change the colors. That doesn't qualify it as a derivative work under US law since there was no (or only minimal) creative work involved. And in any event, NRCan retains copyright over the portion of the work that remains. You are therefore not free to license this file under the GFDL.

You should follow the instructions for obtaining commercial permission, which appears to involve filling out a form provided in PDF format; otherwise we only have non-commercial permission which we cannot use. [3] When you do, you should make sure that NRCan is aware of Wikipedia's licensing requirements, and that although we can attach certain conditions on reuse (see {{CopyrightedFreeUseProvidedThat}}) we cannot control how it will be redistributed. If they do not give permission under those conditions, then we can use neither version of the map. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Georg Meier.jpg

I think that I have over-written this photo as it already exsisted in Wikipedia. Can you help?

(Agljones 10:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC))

No you didn't. The "File history" section of the image description page will show all uploads to the same file name. There's only the one version of this, your upload of 27 January.

However, you do need to add a copyright tag. When you say it's your own copyright, do you mean that you took the photo yourself? If so, you need to release it here under an appropriate license. See WP:ICT#For image creators for suggestions. The image will be deleted if an appropriate license is not granted. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:44, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Image question

Hello -- I posted an image I photographed in 1998 on Baranof Island, Alaska. I posted the photographer's credit. It is my image -- what more do I need to do? Thanks, Barbara Carder.

I am a living person and here is my resume: http://www.hilton.k12.ny.us/bcarderresume.pdf

RE: "Green Cleaning" image of trees - taken in 1998 by Barbara Carder -- what else do I need to do to verify that I am a living person, etc.? http://www.hilton.k12.ny.us/bcarderresume.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbaracarder (talk • contribs)

Barbara - I've tagged your images as {{GFDLpresumed}} - in future you just need to select GFDL or Public domain when you upload your own (i.e. taken yourself) photos. If you have any more questions you can ask me at User talk:Megapixie Megapixie 13:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

We actually shouldn't be using {{GFDLpresumed}} for new material.

Barbara, the issue is that Wikipedia needs the photograph to be available under a free license. To do this, add the appropriate copyright tag (a Wikipedia template that grants the appropriate license) to the image description. To release it under the GFDL, remove {{GFDLpresumed}} and add {{GFDL-self}}. If you'd like to consider other licenses, see WP:ICT#For image creators, which offers some suggestions. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Graffiti

What about photographs/digital scans of Graffiti? The artist(s) would be releasing it into public domain, or would they? What about the person that made the image? Cheers, Dfrg.msc 22:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

To use a photo/scan of graffiti, I believe the person who created the graffiti would have to agree to release it freely. If the creator has not freely released it, taking a picture or scanning it would not make it a free image. ShadowHalo 00:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Graffiti is an interesting case. Technically it's protected by copyright if it's sufficiently original. A heavily stylized tag, for example, is copyrighted because of the creative work required to design it, whereas a short obscene phrase scrawled on a bathroom wall isn't any more than any other short phrase. However, it lacks many of the ordinary protections of copyright such as that against unauthorized alteration. Property owners are free to remove graffiti whenever it appears, and in some places are required to by law. Its creators are also deliberately anonymous to the authorities, and are in no position to profit from their work in places where it's illegal to profit from crimes.

So while any graffiti artist would be a fool to assert copyright over his work, it's by nature ephemeral and is clearly available to us under fair use. Of course, the photographer owns the copyright over the creative aspects of a photo of graffiti as a derivative work, and so it must be licensed separately. A scan would be a different issue, since there's nothing creative involved, but it's difficult to scan a wall. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Licensing Problems

I uploaded Image:Seven Chaos Emeralds.jpg by a user known as Mephitinae (yes I gave her (???) credit)

It can be found here: [4]

The problem is that while it seems that it can be under free license or public domain, the author has said nothing against or for her work being used on other sites. I'm confused. Can someone help, and how do I put the copyright tags on uploaded pictures? ChromeWulf ZX 00:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hm, it seems Mephitinae may have just been giving permission for use on the forum. The problem is that the user hasn't released it for derivative works or commercial use, or even use anywhere else. I recommend that you ask the user if (s)he'll let anyone use the image for any purpose, provided that she is attributed. If (s)he agrees, it can be used with the {{Attribution}} tag. ShadowHalo 00:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

copyright Philip Boileau

Can you tell me if the works of Philip Boileau are under copyright or renewal or are they in the public domain? Thanks, Terry Sita —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Terry07S (talk • contribs) 00:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

He died in 1917. They are in the public domain in those countries with seventy-year post mortem author rules. The practical answer is that you can upload such works to Wikimedia Commons or other Wikimedia projects. If you're interested, we can also use an article on him. Jkelly 00:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

A little confused

I got this message on my user page "Thanks for uploading Image:Agasse, Jacques-Laurent ~ The Playground, 1830, oil on canvas, Oskar Reinhart Collection, Winterthur1.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

   * Wikipedia:Image use policy
   * Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)"

But I had put that the artist who created the image has been dead for more than 100 years, what tag do I need? How do i add it?

any help would be greatly apreciated

this is in regards to this image Image:Agasse,_Jacques-Laurent_~_The_Playground,_1830,_oil_on_canvas,_Oskar_Reinhart_Collection,_Winterthur1.jpg

--DrewWiki 01:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Tag it with {{PD-art}} but that has been done so there is nothing more you need to do.Geni 14:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Resolution for images with permission

Does WP:FUC #3 apply when the image is being used with permission? I noticed Image:NoTimeForLove.jpg was tagged with {{fairusereduce}}, but it appears that the image is being used with permission from the label. ShadowHalo 07:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

The problem appears to be that it was incorrectly tagged from the beginning. The uploader used {{db-noncom}}, which would indicate that if we could use it at all it would only be under some theory of fair use. But the permission granted on the website appears compatible with {{attribution}}. I have altered the description page accordingly and reverted the image to the higher-res version. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I hadn't thought to check the source. Thanks! ShadowHalo 08:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

The terms of use make no mention of commercial use or derivative use. {{attribution}} is wrong. Jkelly 17:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've reverted it to the low resolution version and tagged it with {{fair use reduced}}. In future cases, is it permissible to use a larger resolution image when permission is given? ShadowHalo 17:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The only case I would do that is when the copyright holder explicitly asks us to. This does happen with logos sometimes. Jkelly 18:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it just says "use":

You do not need to ask permission to use any press photos, live photos, logos, etc... In fact, we encourage you to use this stuff, so please, feel free. Please credit the photographers for any photos that you use. (emphasis mine).

There's no limitation specified on commercial or derivative use; in fact, "encourage" and "feel free" strongly imply the opposite. The only requirement given is attribution. I disagree with your analysis here. TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Rights are reserved unless specifically licensed away. If you are confident that they'll release the work for commercial and derivative use, please have them send mail to us at permissions AT wikimedia DOT org. You can find boilerplate requests here. Jkelly 21:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't actually care that much; just expressing my disagreement. It seems to me that when rights are granted using very broad, nontechnical language like this, then it's merely copyright paranoia not to take them at their word. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

So you're not volunteering to actually do the minimal amount of work to back up your opinion, you just want to be able to state it and then pathologise the disagreement? Thanks for clarifying that. Jkelly 00:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't upload it, and I really have no interest in the subject matter. I just think that "you do not need to ask permission" means that we don't need to ask permission, and to interpret it as meaning something else is very much of a stretch. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

?

i dont know how to do this cn you send me instuctions?

Source of claim in Template:Military-Insignia

The template claims that:

"Copyrighting combatant identification and/or rank insignia violates international law; hence this image cannot be copyrighted and belongs to the public domain. This applies worldwide"

Has anyone heard of such a law?DGtal 10:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was part of the Geneva convention - but upon researching it - I can't find it referenced. It should really be documented on the template in some way. I'll try chasing the templates creator. Megapixie 00:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The insignia are licence free (ask in the next military shop around the corner). Wandalstouring 01:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

In the US that would be true of US insignia regardless of international law, as a matter of Federal law. But is the same true for, say, France? If so, what law makes it so? If the guy in the military shop around the corner knows the answer to that one, come tell us. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I suspect that the reasoning here is as follows: the Hague Convention requires that combatants be identified by fixed, recognizable insignia. For this to be practical, it would obviously be necessary that these insignia be documentable by other parties; hence, copying them cannot be prohibited.

(But obviously I'm neither an attorney nor someone with any real expertise in international law; so take that with a large grain of salt.) Kirill Lokshin 05:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I see the logic, but that can only justify registering ranks in military and intelligence manuals etc. Geneva convention doesn't say one relinquishes the legal rights to his insignia (i think).

If I would commercially mass produce ranks and insignia of any country, even abroad, I would expect them to sue me (unless local law is different) or otherwise try to stop me (which might be dangerous...). DGtal 09:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't see why. Military personnel all over the world hire independent creators to manufacture insignia for themselves and their units. If it looks like the military-approved insignia, they're usually allowed to wear it, which I would think says something about the government's attitude towards outsiders using their creations. --ScreaminEagle 21:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of whether any government would seriously act to protect its copyright to military insignia, if governments do hold such copyrights, the claim in {{Military-Insignia}} and {{Military Insignia}} really merits substantiation. (By the way, shouldn’t one of those templates be enough?) We provide a minimal rationale for the copyright status of other images (more than minimal in the case of {{PD-Russia}}) and this should be no exception, especially considering questions like [5] and [6]. Regarding requirements under the laws of warfare to identify combatants, my impression from reading the Hague and Geneva documents is that each side should provide the documentation on its forces to the other side, anyway, eliminating our problem for them. Unfortunately we can’t quite yet declare war on the rest of the world for the purpose of resolving the problem here. —xyzzy_n 14:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Copywrite tag question

Image:Webheader1.jpg

I put up several photos of KEEN athletes and activities. KEEN owns these photos, but I'm not sure what tpye of tag to use. KEEN is a non-profit, 501(c)3 organization. Help?

--Jafralady 13:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyright Tag for MentoringAward2005.jpg ?

I have tried to comply with the rules, however, there appeared to be no appropriate "Copyright tag" description available on the pull-down menu.

I would very much appreciate knowing what to do next to have this accepted? And, could you please let me know via my talk page?

Based on my reading of rules and guidelines, I wrote the following concerning this image:

File:MentoringAward2005.jpg

Image created by Wikipedalist, creator and copyright holder of original medallion art pictured.

Fair use for article, McDonald Award for Excellence in Mentoring and Advising:

The image, MentoringAward2005.jpg, linked here is claimed to be used under "fair use - statue" since it is a photo of a three-dimensional work of art and only being used for informational purposes. Its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because it shows the subject of this article to the general public.

This is a two-dimensional representation of a copyrighted three-dimensional work of art. As such it is a derivative work of art, and, per US Copyright Act of 1976, § 106(2), who owns copyright of the original has the exclusive right to authorize derivative works. Per § 107 is it believed that reproduction for comment, teaching, scholarship and criticism constitutes fair use and does not infringe copyright.

It is believed that the use of a picture to illustrate the three-dimensional work of art in question or to discuss the artistic genre or technique of the work of art on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement.

Thanks, Wikipedalist 20:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Brazilian government

I have received a message that I need to apply a tag indicating the copyright of the image Image:Bairros-regionaisBH.jpg. Images produced by the Brazilian federal government, the states or municipalities are automatically in the public domain, but there is no tag for that. How do I proceed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Macgreco (talk • contribs).

I just created {{PD-BrazilGov}} (based on the commons template) - but it doesn't apply in this case - can you link to somewhere stating that government or municipal works are public domain ? Megapixie 03:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe that tag is incorrect. The law cited in the tag is not about copyrights, but trademarks. These are two different issues. Just because some work is not eligible for trademark does not mean that it is not copyrightable. The law governing copyright is here: [7] and I can find nothing that states that all works of the Brazilian government is PD. See article 8. The texts of laws and so forth cannot be copyrighted, but nothing is said about images. Article 6 prohibits the government from taking the copyright of works it subsidizes, but that just means they remain with the actual author. I can find nothing to support either the claim made by the tag or that made by Macgreco. If he knows where this law exists, he should point it out. TCC (talk) (contribs) 04:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm digging around pt - you would seem to be correct - there is no tag for it in pt.Category:Image Tags. Goes to show you - just because you have a template on commons with hundreds of images assigned to it - doesn't mean that it's right. Megapixie 05:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Tag for postage stamp with permission of Postal authorities

File:Amputee soccer, stamp Salv-C546.jpeg

The Amputee soccer, stamp Salv-C546.jpeg was scanned 31 Jan 2007 by me from an original stamp. Specific permission to use images of El Salvador postage stamps for non-commercial educational, philatelic and cultural purposes is contained in an email message dated 11 January 2007 from Silvia María Orantes, Head of the Philatelic Office, Government of El Salvador. I had emailed her asking for this permission. For text, see: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stamps/Public_domain

I believe the appropriate tag should be

since the stamp is not Public Domain, but permission for free use has been granted by the Salvadorian Postal Authorities.

Jack Child 13:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

That license you gave doesn't exist. I think you mean {{copyrighted}}. Since they don't allow commercial use, we can only use it "With permission" and you probably would have picked {{Non-commercial from license selector}} in the dropdown box, which means we must use it under fair use, and not free. In order to use it as that you must license it as fair use (see {{Fairusein}}) and provide a rationale as to why we must have this image on Wikipedia. Looking as to how it's used I don't think you can provide a justification as to why we must have that image (stamp) on that article, as it seems to just be "Hey, this stamp image depicts this event", but the stamp doesn't seem too important to the article (ie, it appears Decorative under the fair use policy which is a bad thing). A rationale should explain this is not the case because..... Good luck! --MECU≈talk 17:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Non-Comm question

Ok, I know of the policy regarding no non-commercial images, but I do not know the why. I can't find it on any policy page anywhere. I have a photographer on Flickr with some images I'd like to use. He has them CC-BY-SA-NC-2.0 and I was trying to get him to drop the non-commercial part. But he didn't like the idea of allowing them for commercial use and he questioned Wikipedia's intent. I do not know how to respond to that. Any advice?↔NMajdan•talk 16:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Basicaly Wikipedia can not use any license that forbid something that would is permited by the GNU Free Documentation License. The GFDL explicitly permits modification, distribution and use for any purpose (including commercial), so any license that forbid commercial use, or the making of derivative works or restrict use to just scertain audiences (educational use only etc) and things like that are simply not compatable, and is not considered free content. --Sherool (talk) 16:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

That makes sense. Thank you.↔NMajdan•talk 16:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

There's a very good essay about this at User:Fastfission/Noncommercial that discusses some concerns that people have when allowing their pictures for commercial/non-educational use. ShadowHalo 23:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Question about a picture

Hello. I'm wondering what the appropriate tag is for a picture I found online of guitarist Tom Morello from his high school yearbook.

Source of image: http://www.metalsludge.tv/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=822&Itemid=39

Orbital Hitman 03:56, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Probably none. The high school yearbook, including the photographs, is presumably a copyrighted work. Unless you can make a case for fair use (I do not think this is likely), the image is not suitable for Wikipedia. In general, images you find on the WWW are not usable unless they are accompanied by information to the contrary. —xyzzy_n 12:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Government emblems

Image:New Bedford, MA Seal.jpg appears to have been deleted. It was used on the New Bedford article, presumably under a fair use rationale. Is there a way to tell why it was deleted? I want to replace it if possible, but don't want to repeat whatever problem lead to its deletion. Thanks. -- Siobhan Hansa 11:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

The log for the image says ‘Image with unknown copyright status as of 29 December 2006’. This probably means there was no copyright tag on the image page. —xyzzy_n 12:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks xyzzy. I didn't realize I needed "Image:" before the image name when searching the log. I'll try uploading again and puttin gin a fair use rationale. -- Siobhan Hansa 14:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Rajasaurus -2.jpg

What copyright tag should I use for this image? I also uploaded three more images that are from the same artist, with the same description, so I should use the tag for those too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Benosaurus (talk • contribs) 15:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC).

The image in question is Image:Rajasaurus_-2.jpg. The artist, Todd Marshall, has communicated with Benosaurus, giving permission to use (on Wikipedia at least). J. Spencer 15:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright disputed

Hi. Could someone please review and resolve the dispute of the copyright status of the image [Lcurve.jpg]. I added the image with the permission of the institute where I found it, but it has been disputed by Bkell on 21 January. I don't quite understand what the problem is. I don't have enough experience in this to judge. Thanks. Billtubbs 18:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

This is being discussed at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images#January_21. If we can demonstrate conclusively that this came from the United States Geological Survey, we might be confident saying that the Smithsonian is wrong, but it may be better to find an example that the Smithsonian isn't claiming copyright over. Do note that, in the future, one shouldn't be uploading "non-commercial / for educational use only" media here. Jkelly 18:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

How do I add a picture correctly?

How do I add a picture correctly so it is not removed from a page? Mufc13 22:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

If you are talking about Image:MHutch.jpg, you shouldn't be adding it to an article at all, as there is no indication that this photograph is licensed properly. See Wikipedia:Licensing for more information. The technical problem that you were having is that you were not getting the file name correct. Jkelly 22:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Moir photo

this is a picture that Rob gave me of himself for this page...It was also given to CBC and used on their elections profile page. Its actually his faculty picture with the University...basically, what I'm saying is that it is fair use

Rob Moir

Can you help as i dont understand this image tagging thing.--Mtminardi 22:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

You need to add {{rfu}} to the image description page. That will put it into the correct deletion queue. We don't want images of living people that are not freely licensed. Jkelly 22:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

glcyo pic

Had an image tagged by orphanbot as not having an appropriate tag or something like that. Reading through the information on this, I have no idea what the heck is going on. This is the image in question, and it's original source.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=glyco.figgrp.1703

Corvus.ag 06:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we cannot use this image. The page is hosted by a US Government site, but the material doesn't appear to be a work of the US Government. So unlike such works, its copyrighted, and the web page is marked accordingly. It's not eligible for fair use, because a free version of this diagram could be produced and released under a free license. With relatively little trouble too as such things go; it's not very sophisticated art.

For more guidance, start with WP:IUP and WP:ICT. TCC (talk) (contribs) 06:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

thanx. I'm still learning all of this, and its quite confusing. I have a software program that allows me to create images similar to this. If I use that to generate an image, should I reference the software?

--corvus.ag 20:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Why do I need to "indicate the source and creator of the image"?

Why do I need to "indicate the source and creator of the image" if it's a game cover, where do you think the bloody souce is! THE COVER OF THE GAME! And what does it matter who created them? It is only showing a cover of something, not something the someone made like a painting or a clipart, etc.! [8] Is there any way i can get them back, or do I need to upload them AGAIN! Adammw 07:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

When it comes to covers, there is still a source and creator, though they're a bit different than normal photographs. The source is the game itself, and the creator is usually the company that created the game and owns the copyright to the game. Take a look at Image:Ffviibox.jpg as an example. Did you specify both of these in the summary for the image (as opposed to the title)? If not, that may have been why the images were deleted. ShadowHalo 09:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Image

I uploaded an image of Cardinal Walter Kasper ( Image:Cardinalwkasper.jpg ) yesterday from www.catholicnews.com/jpii/cardinals/0502295.htm. This was my first time uploading an image on Wikipedia, and I don't even know where to look for any copyright information. Could you please help? __Tajm 19:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

In this case, scrolling down to the bottom of the page from which you took the image would have been enough: ‘Copyright (c) 2005 Catholic News Service/USCCB. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed.’ This means we cannot use that image on Wikipedia. However, we already have another image, Image:340px-Kardinal-kasper-moskau.jpg, which we can use. I have put it into the article. Is it a reasonable replacement? The image you uploaded will be deleted on or after February 9.

In general, please keep in mind that most images and other content are copyrighted by default and we cannot use them on Wikipedia unless the copyright holder explicitely grants the permission to use, copy, modify and sell the content. (There is the exception of fair use, but it does not apply in this case.) —xyzzy_n 21:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I Got a Question

This picture is taken from online magazine [9].

I know the editor personally and she told me I can use any picture from her website as long as I put "Copyright: Azerbaijan International".

So, what should I do to avoid the speedy deletion of this photo? Thanks. --Zondi 02:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)