Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 April 28

April 28

File:Underground entrance.jpg

Photographer does not own copyright to statue. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 03:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose deletion, undeletion requested. It is completely unwarranted. It is ridiculous that a photo cannot include a statue or any other outdoor object on a public street, regardless of the object's copyright. It is the freedom of panorama. Even if the law somehow fails to include this obvious provision, the photo is still fair use and therefore should be restored with such a license tag and rationale.  –radiojon (talk) 14:21, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Billa1.jpg

Appears to be copyvio from here. Uploader claims to be copyright holder, but image is from a major studio and is watermarked. Radiant chains (talk) 06:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Billa01.jpg

Non-watermarked version of File:Billa1.jpg. Widely available on the internet, unlikely that uploader is copyright holder. Radiant chains (talk) 07:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Aidaluna_seatrial.jpg

Copied from [1]. Rettetast (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Stateroom.jpg

Copied from [2]. Rettetast (talk) 13:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Musicportal.gif

Displays copyrighted content (Windows interface) Stifle (talk) 13:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

The look of the "Windows interface" is not copyrightable and the icons fall under De minimis. Tothwolf (talk) 23:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The look of the Windows interface absolutely is copyrightable, though this image may not infringe on that copyright. The icons may well be de minimis... but it should be possible to crop the image. Then again, it isn't included anywhere, and was only useful in a comment nearly 2 years ago. Is it still needed? Is it okay with you if it's deleted? – Quadell ^(talk) 13:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I disagree on the Windows interface look being copyrightable. The actual code/implementation is certainly copyrightable but the look itself is not. See Look and feel and Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc.. I have no opinion on this file itself but "Displays copyrighted content (Windows interface)" is not a valid argument and reason for deletion. Tothwolf (talk) 13:55, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

For that fact, there are a lot more screenshots linked in that discussion than just this one. Tothwolf (talk) 14:05, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

File:GOLD screenshot.gif

Template:Pui top Uploader is unlikely to have the right to release this image into the public domain. Stifle (talk) 13:42, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Devin Cook is the software author, he has every right to release a screenshot of his own software into the public domain if he so chooses. The other screenshots such as File:GOLD_Builder_v3.4.gif are already on Commons, this one should be moved there as well. Tothwolf (talk) 23:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

File:SMHpic.jpg

If the image is from the Syndey Morning Herald then I'm doubtful that the uploader is the copyright holder. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)