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)

Egypt copyright law (1954)

Hi there. I see User:Ashashyou has placed this image Mahmoud Khalil Al-Housary under public domain by the virtue of Egypt's 1954 law that was applicable on works published prior to 2002.

So, would the Qur'an (audio) recitations of the famous Egyptian reciters (El Minshawi, Al Hussary, Abdul Basit Abdus Samad, Mustafa Ismail) fall under public domain too, especially since most of them published their works well before 2002 regardless of whether anyone claims legal rights to the recitals (record companies or firms that acquired rights to the recordings post their deaths or secured rights in other countries)?

Thanks.

Originally asked here: User_talk:Ashashyou#Egypt_copyright_laws and here Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1068#Egypt_copyright_law_(1954).

The Dawoodi Bohra Geometric Shape and Text Logo Copyright

Hi, I see that Quora's logo is placed in the public domain because it is not originally creative and has a bunch of text / geometric shape to it (ref: Commons:File:Quora_logo_2015.svg).

I wanted to ask if this logo of TheDawoodiBohras.com could be in public domain, too? The reasoning is: The geometric pattern that forms the central theme of the logo is taken from one of the floral designs uncovered during the renovations of Al Anwar mosque of Cairo (see: Commons:File:Al-Hakim_Mosque_-_Cairo_2.jpg), and the rest of it is text.

Thoughts?

Posting pictures

Hello! I seem to have liked Wikipedia more and more, and as such, want the other users to know me better. I intend to post a picture of me in my page, yet I don't know the guidelines to do so. My questions (listed in order so as to avoid unnecessary, frivolous discussions)

• 1. Will I need to post the image first in Wikipedia Commons?
  • 1a. If not, what (engine/wizard) shall I use/how shall i do it?
  • 2a. Will there be paperwork signed? If so, can my explanation work (stated as follows), "This is me, ipso facto, i will not, and shall not engage in nugatory copystrikes". If it won't work, where will i sign the thingy?
  • 1b. If however, posting to wiki commons isn't the case, how shall upload then? It shall be my pleasure if you enlighten me.

That is all, thank you for reading my tedious query, and have a good day! :> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ice bear johny (talk • contribs) 17:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ice bear johny. If you’re the copyright holder of the photo you want to upload (which always isn’t the case as explained in c:COM:L), then you should be able to upload it to Commons if you want. As long as the licensing you choose is acceptable for Commons, there should be no issues. Please understand though that the only types of “free” licenses that Commons (and Wikipedia) accept are generally not very restrictive; so, basically you’d be giving anyone in the world permission to download the photo at any time and use for any purpose (even to make money of off); moreover, once you do so, you can’t change your mind later on. By uploading the file, you won’t be transferring your copyright ownership to Commons or anyone else, but you will be making a version of the photo freely available to others to pretty much use as they please. If you find out someone is using it in a way that you don’t like, you might be able to get them to stop doing so for some non-copyright reason, but you won’t be able to claim they’re violating your copyright as long as they are complying with the terms of the license you chose. In addition, Commons won’t go after others on your behalf if someone is doing something you don’t like. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Oof what? So even if i put {{PD-self}} other people would be able to use that picture? Btw thanks for answering my question hehehe— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ice bear johny (talk • contribs) 04:06, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ice bear johny: if you use the licence PD-self you really are giving permission to anyone to use your image, anywhere, for any reason and you would retain no control over it at all. Better to use something like {{cc-by-sa-4.0}} where others can use your photo but have to attribute you where ever they use the image.

You say you're thinking of posting a picture of yourself. Do you own the copyright - this is normally because you took the photo yourself. If you didn't press the button then it's highly likely that you aren't the copyright holder and can't use the photo without the permission of the person who did. Nthep (talk) 16:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Oof better change my copyright thingy then. Thanks for the information!:> Greatly appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ice bear johny (talk • contribs) 17:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

​ If you didn't take the photos yourself, then you shouldn't really be uploading them to either Wikipedia or Commons as explained in c:COM:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyirght holder. In addition to the two photos on your user page, you also seem to have uploaded quite a number of photos like File:JonesBridgePH.jpg and File:ManilaPostOffice.jpg as {{PD-Philippines}}. What makes you think these photos are PD-Philippines? You've provided no source information or any other information about the provenance of the files to support any claim of "PD-Philippines". Did you take these photos yourself or did you find them somewhere online? Copyright licensing can be quite tricky, but you shouldn't be uploading files if you're unable to at least specify where they came from. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Lol i live in the Philippines, plus those pictures can be searched in the web. Additionally, i took them from the official website of the Mayor, so that's why i put {{PD-Philippines}}.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ice bear johny (talk • contribs) 03:33, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia takes copyright matters quite seriously and where you live has doesn't pretty much doesn't have anything to do with the copyright status of photos that you didn't take yourself. In addition, being publically available online doesn't make a photo publich domain. The photos you uploaded can be seen here where someone is claiming copyright over them; if they also appeared on the mayor's website, then can you provide a link to where you saw them there. Sometimes people (even mayors) unpload photos to their websites that they don't have copyright ownership over, but that they might've been given permission to use by the photos copyright holders or might be using under as fair use; so, I'm not sure it can be automatically assumed that the mayor is the copyirght holder of the photos.

Finally, please try to sign your talk page posts. If you're not sure how to do that, please follow the instructions in WP:SIGN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:36, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:Debitpixie § Question about an edit you made to File:Bharti Airtel Limited logo.svg

 You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Debitpixie § Question about an edit you made to File:Bharti Airtel Limited logo.svg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Template:Z48

Perhaps some others can take a look at File:Bharti Airtel Limited logo.svg and File:Airtel logo.svg and do a TOO assessment. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:12, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

New logo upload

I have a new logo to add to the wikipedia page as a result of a brand change of the organization Nagarro. While I have uploaded the new logo here [[1]], could I receive some assistance at what more needs to be done here and how can I get the logo replaced? I am an employee of the organization and have disclosed my COI. Buzztrack (talk) 18:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Buzztrack. It appears that the version of the logo that you uploaded has already been added to main infobox of Nagarro per Talk:Nagarro#Nagarro new logo: Update, Aug 28, 2020; so, there's nothing else you really need to do.

For future reference, I suggest you read c:COM:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS? and c:COM:LRV if you plan to upload and more files on behalf of your company Nagarro to Commons again. Nagarro can, of course, upload content like its logo, etc. to Commons if it wants, but it will need to be released under a license that Commons accepts and the organization's c:COM:CONSENT will need to be verified. Moreover, the types of licenses that Commons accepts pretty much would allow anyone anywhere in the world to download the content and reuse for any purpose (including commercial reuse); so, you (they) might want to take that into account. In other words, once you release content under such a license, Nagarro won't really be able to prevent others from using the content in a way that might not be in the best intrests of the organization. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:11, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Looks like the issue was resolved at Talk:Nagarro#Nagarro_new_logo:_Update,_Aug_28,_2020 by tagging the logo as non-free and uploading it with a fair use rationale. (That and the alternative advice to seek WP:OTRS permission are valid solutions.) However, it appears that the logo is below the threshold of originality for the U.S. (appears to be the main place of business) and Germany (if the logo originates with the corporate parent instead), so I tagged it with {{PD-logo}} instead. I also did the same for the previous version of the logo. TheFeds 05:26, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

SPDX Logo

Is the SPDX logo (https://spdx.dev/wp-content/uploads/sites/41/2020/04/SPDX_Logo-01.svg) able to be added for the SPDX page? It's a single SVG with the logo and typeface, but I have absolutely 0 understanding of copyright, so I'll need help on how to do this right. WhoAteMyButter (📬│✏️) 18:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi WhoAteMyButter. It appears that you've figured this out on your own. Do you have any other questions? -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:14, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Nope. Just decided to be bold and do it anyway. WhoAteMyButter (📬│✏️) 05:17, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

That logo can go as {{PD-logo}} because it is below the threshold of originality for the U.S. (assuming the copyright belongs to the Linux Foundation, based there). I've changed it. (As a practical matter, given the nature of what SPDX is, it wouldn't surprise me if the logo was released under another copyright licence too.) TheFeds 04:13, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

How to publish this image

Hello, I tried uploading this image from National polytechnic museum in Sofia, which has given me permission via email to publish it here, but it got deleted as possible copyright violation, how can I publish it without doing anything wrong? MotoJawaCZ (talk) 19:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

MotoJawaCZ: The Flickr uses can do one of two things: change the licence on Flickr, even is temporarily until the image has been verified, or make an OTRS permission statement per one of the two options shown on this webpage c:Commons:Email templates/Consent. ww2censor (talk) 20:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The software icon in the SkiFree article main infobox

The article SkiFree has an image of a software icon, File:SkiFree icon.gif, in the article's main infobox. The question I have is whether the usage of the icon in the infobox is appropriate. The page https://ski.ihoc.net/ shows what appears to be the same icon in its "Sights and Sounds" section and states that the icon was made by "some graphic artist at Microsoft." The WP article indicates that the SkiFree game was released for multiple platforms. I do not know if different icons were used for all of the different releases. From what I remember, the iOS release of the SkiFree game from GearSprout has an icon that is similar to the icon in the article infobox. In the "Ports and releases" section of the WP article, there is a statement about SkiFree and proprietary rights and about GearSprout being able to do a version of the game. --Elegie (talk) 07:41, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Is the question whether the icon is copyrighted by Microsoft, or instead Gearsprout? In any event, does {{Non-free Microsoft screenshot}} help clarify Microsoft's position on the issue if it is indeed their work? (The text of that template is for screenshots, but the permission is wider-ranging.) TheFeds 04:35, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Is this photo PD?

Hello, I'm looking for guidance on the copyright status of a photo available here. The copyright is given on the very photo as "Maull & Fox : 187A Piccadilly, London (1879-85)", for which a few details are given here. I found just a handful of photos from this source on Commons (e.g. File:Markham_Le_Fer_Taylor.jpg), though this may simply indicate that the collection includes mostly images of non-notable individuals. Would you say the photo is PD? For what it's worth, the individual depicted on it was born in 1863 and died in 1932, and the photo was taken sometime in the 1890s. Thank you for your feedback. Toccata quarta (talk) 08:09, 7 September 2020 (UTC)‎

This is apparently in the public domain; the exact tag to use depends on the details. Am I correct the photo is intended to be of Shapurji Sorabji the father, not Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji the son? According to the article Henry Maull, Maull & Fox were no longer in partnership in the 1890s (only from 1879–1885, as stated in the caption). Apparently the business continued under that name for some time, perhaps at a different location. If it was taken by the individuals Maull and Fox, but perhaps at a different date (the subject could be aged no more than 22 during the time listed as their partnership, assuming correct date of birth information), {{PD-old-100}} applies given Maull and Fox's deaths in 1914 and 1907 respectively. If you are sure the photo was taken in the 1890s, but have no idea who published it or when, then I think it still barely passes the worst-case test (unpublished and anonymous) for {{PD-US-unpublished}}. Given some inferences about the authorship or publication, and even if the date was later than the 1890s, it might be subject to {{PD-US-expired}} (for the United States, which is sufficient for Wikipedia) and {{PD-old-70}} (for the United Kingdom, which in combination with the preceding would make the photo suitable for Wikimedia Commons). Perhaps someone knows how Maull & Fox images were typically published? TheFeds 07:38, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks for the information. Yes, the photo is of Shapurji Sorabji, the composer's father. I will do a bit of checking to find out when it was first published and hope to get back to you soon. Toccata quarta (talk) 08:11, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I had a look into Marc-André Roberge's book Opus sorabjianum and found that the photo was reproduced in at least two sources a few years after it was taken. Here is the information provided:

"Institution of Civil Engineers (London), 'Supplementary Notice for Election into the Institution', 17 May 1887. Shapurji Sorabji was proposed by William Inglis. This Institution also owns the original of one of the few of Shapurji Sorabji's known photographs (the one reproduced in the Textile Mercury). The photograph, taken in 1887 by Maull & Fox, 187a Piccadilly, is contained in a binder entitled Photographs of Members, Associate Members, and Associates of the Institution of Civil Engineers—Cabinets." (p. 35)

"'Mr. Shapurjee Sorabjee: A Pioneer of India's Industrial Development', The Textile Mercury (Manchester), 1 April 1905: [2]-7 (p. 2 consists of a photograph of Shapurji Sorabji; the article was reprinted, probably at his request, for promotional purposes)" (p. 34)

I don't know if the photographer is specified in any source (and it was taken after the Maull & Fox partnership ended), but Sean Vaughn Owen's Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji: An Oral Biography simply gives "Unknown photographer" in the photo details (p. 328). Toccata quarta (talk) 08:43, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Broken bot - flags fair use image as being used on page with no valid non-free use rationale

I was trying to add the file "Bristol VA and Bristol TN flag.gif" (flag of the twin cities of Bristol, Virginia and Bristol, Tennessee) to Bristol, Virginia, but the JJMC89 bot flagged it as being on a page with "no valid non-free use rationale". I doubt that's true, since the same image is used on Bristol, Tennessee page without any problems. Please fix this problem or take the bot offline for repairs.

--73.123.30.85 (talk) 02:03, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 73.123.30.85. A separate specific non-free use rationale is required for each use of a non-free file per WP:NFCC#10c; this means that if a non-free file is being used in more than one article or more than once in the same article, then a rationale needs to be provided for each individual use. That's why the bot is removing the file. If you believe that's file's non-free use in the other article can be justified per WP:NFCCP, then you should added a rationale for that particular use to the file's page and then re-add the file to the article. However, simply adding a rationale for a particular use is not in and of itself an automatic justification for non-free use as explained in WP:JUSTONE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:40, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

But the file is the flag for both cities. Plus, I don't know how to provide a "separate specific non-free use rationale". How do I? 2601:199:4181:E00:C8BA:F933:63CF:7A66 (talk) 04:43, 10 September 2020 (UTC)