Template talk:Non-free television screenshot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Fair use    (Inactive)
WikiProject icon This template was within the scope of WikiProject Fair use, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.

Please replace image[edit]

I have created an SVG version, Image:TV-copyright.svg. Please replace it if you have the power! Thanks! Tkgd2007 (talk) 06:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Capitalization and Template:Television-screenshot[edit]

I tried to find this template earlier and was thrown off by the capitalization. That is, I looked for Template:TV-screenshot and thus did not find Template:tv-screenshot. And, when I couldn't find a TV-specific fair use tag for TV, I created my own: Template:Television-screenshot.

So, how can we best merge all these together? I think Template:tv-screenshot should be the standard. Should there be redirects from the other forms of it? Can you use redirects with templates? --Jeremy Butler 20:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it's OK to redirect templates (it's OK if it works). I know it's not OK to redirect categories as Mediawiki doesn't support that yet, so the article ends up not being categorized properly.
chocolateboy 21:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


Since "ident" is a term used only in the U.K. and Australia, as far as I know, shouldn't it be replaced with a term that's more universal? It's definitely not used in U.S. broadcasting. --Jeremy Butler 20:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I changed the spellings/terminology to US as the context is United States copyright law.
chocolateboy 05:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Recent change[edit]

This template is now included in the category Category:Screenshots of television. [1] That makes sense for the screenshots, but may (if the intention was to highlight this template on that page) or may not (templates aren't screenshots) make sense for the template. Was that deliberate?

chocolateboy 13:12, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

4 Criteria for Fair Use[edit]

Under US copyright law, there are four factors for determining "fair use":[2]

  1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
  2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
  3. amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
  4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

I'd recommend that the tv-screenshot template create a bullet list that highlights these factors, which the current revision makes a start at:

It is believed that the use of a limited number of web-resolution screenshots

  • for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents
  • 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.

which might be revised thus:

It is believed that the use

  • of a very limited portion of the original work (one frame out of thousands),
  • which will likely have no detrimental impact on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work,
  • for criticism, comment, scholarship, and research on the station ID or program and its contents
  • 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.

Note: I removed "web-resolution screenshots" because resolution has no impact on a fair-use defense. Same goes for "identification." --Jeremy Butler 12:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Question on use[edit]

If someone uploads a tv-screenshot of a person in a program and uses it in the article about the actor, is it acceptable fair use (f. ex. Jamie Hyneman, Dan Rather)? How about 5 tv-screenshots in one article? Also is the tv-screenshot usable in an article about a fictional character that the actor plays (f.ex. George_Costanza, Rachel_Green)?

Or for example a tv-screenshot of a building, is it usable in an article about the building?

Currently the license says:

  • for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents

the last 3 words "and its contents" give an ambiguous open-ended suggestion for possible usage of tv-screenshots. feydey 15:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC) feydey 15:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I would have thought that a limited number of screenshots (preference = one) of an actor is acceptable, so long as their role in the show is discussed in the article. This is the difference from magazine covers: most articles using a magazine as fair use to identify the person on its cover didn't/couldn't discuss the magazine in the article. ("Tom Cruise appeared on the front cover of the Radio Times" would hardly be fitting for his article.)
So, the actor is a "content" of the TV show, so I think we're OK there. The image caption would need to specify its source. "Dan Rather, from a telecast in October 2004", is, in my opinion, unsatisfactory -- the program needs to be cited.
I'm unsure about the meaning of 'critical commentary', however -- I don't think that fits in with an encyclopedia in either of its senses.
I think screenshots of buildings, though, are less acceptible -- unless that specific TV show can be legitmately mentioned in the article, which, in most cases, I doubt. Like my Tom Cruise example, mentioning that Durham Cathedral (hypothetical example) was on Britain's Best Buildings is a slight understatement. Plus, it is much easier to get a free alternative for most buildings than it is actors.
I appreciate your previous comments that a fair use image disguises the fact that we need a free use replacement. I wonder if we could come up with some system that made the need for free use more transparent in fair use images? The JPS talk to me 18:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


In all our talk of fair use, we also need to keep a look out for misuse of this tag. I've just caught Image:Facade.jpg: the meta-data clearly says that this isnt't a screenshot! I'm sure there are others. I'll assume good faith and assume that uploaders don't understand what a screenshot is. It is always possible that some will be hoping we don't notice, though. The JPS talk to me 18:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Per discussion at Wikipedia:Fair use review#30 November 2006 pertaining to Image:Chandra suresh.JPG, I think some clarification is in order, perhaps just in a <noinclude> usage note.  Anþony  talk  12:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Request (adding interwiki)[edit]

{{editprotected}} Hi. Can someone add this Arabic interwiki: [[ar:قالب:Tv-screenshot]]? Thanks. - Omar 180 07:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

It appears to be there already. CMummert · talk 23:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

{{Non-free media}}[edit]


Throw {{Non-free media}} somewhere in the tag. Kotepho 13:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Also, please ask nicely. Cheers. --MZMcBride 17:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


Is it really true that screenshots don't need sources, and that they cannot be tagged with {{nsd}}? Punkmorten 09:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Also Apply to YouTube Videos?[edit]

Does this licensing also apply to screenshots of YouTube videos, or does it only work for television? Thanks --Mr.crabby (Talk) 11:19, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Free television screenshot[edit]

Is there any template for medias like this? -- Bojan  20:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion: Reminder to use JPEGs[edit]

According to Wikipedia:IUP#FORMAT, all TV-screenshots should be JPEGs. This especially makes sense with Non-free images, as they are supposed to be of lower quality. But even if they weren't, one can create a high quality JPEG.

My suggestion is to add this to the template, so we don't keep getting so many PNGs.— trlkly 01:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 December 2012[edit]

As far as I can tell, the change to this template made by SchuminWeb on November 19 was never discussed, and thus there was no consensus for it established. This makes it a Bold edit. I would like to take the next step in WP:BRD and Revert it, but I cannot, since I am not an admin. Therefore I request that an admin revert SchuminWeb's edit of November 19. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:57, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Please see my comment at Template talk:Non-free video game cover#Edit request on 17 December 2012. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:02, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Done. See discussion at User talk:SchuminWeb#Changes in the wording of "Non-free" templates. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:38, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 22th July 2015[edit]

As has been discussed here, the "Non-free use rationale television screenshot" has been deprecated and is being deleted. It should be removed from this template to discourage people from reusing it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:54, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Is there a replacement template that should be used instead, or should the whole line be removed? Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jackmcbarn: {{Non-free use rationale}} was mentioned in the discussion, and appears to be a standard template for making rationales. Other more specific non-free content tags suggest that template as well, e.g {{Non-free Otto Perry image}}. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:56, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Edit request on 18 October 2015[edit]

Can we please add the following to the list that shows up with no FU rationale:


"This tag should not be used for screenshots of title cards of television programs; instead, use {{Non-free title-card}}.

I can't tell you how many times I've had to change {{Non-free television screenshot}} to {{Non-free title-card}} in images that should have the latter- which, on a related note, has a hard-to-remember name because "title-card" is hyphenated. Same with {{Non-free character}}- At least once each, I typed them as "Non-free title card" and "Non-free character artwork" (instead of "Non-free title-card" and "Non-free character" respectively, which made them show up wrong in the preview.

Also, although this may go somewhere else, it sure is a hassle typing up:

{{Template name}} (can't type up the syntax since putting nowikis inside nowikis causes problems)

...as I had to do five times in this edit request. I think we should have a template for making template links. For example:

{{Template link|Template name}}

would render {{Template name}} (damn it I had to type up the current syntax again)

Edit: Can we remove "...of a copyrighted television program or station ID".from the template, for obvious reasons?

 – Hop on Bananas (talk) 13:44, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

@Hop on Bananas: Actually, {{template link|template name}} will do exactly what you said it should:
{{template link|template name}} → {{template name}}
Also, you can shorten it to "tl":
{{tl|template name}} → {{template name}}
Another thing: if you find it hard to remember whether to use {{Non-free title-card}} or {{Non-free title card}}, you can just redirect the latter to the former, and then you will be able to use both. You can use a template redirect exactly the same way that you can use a template. (In this case, it looks like another user already created the redirect a week or so ago.)

As for the request itself, where would you like the new text to go, exactly? Could you add it to Template:Non-free television screenshot/sandbox, by any chance? Also, what are the obvious reasons that we should remove "station ID" for? I don't work in this area very much, so it's not obvious to me. :) Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 14:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Becase we already have a template for title cards. Hop on Bananas (talk) 15:12, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

@Hop on Bananas: yellow tickY Partly done I added language about using {{Non-free television screenshot}}, but I'm waiting on a rationale for removing "Station ID". --Ahecht (TALK
) 20:12, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

For the same reason. Hop on Bananas (talk) 20:22, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

@Hop on Bananas:  Done Oops, I didn't see that the title card template included station IDS. I'll update it now. --Ahecht (TALK
) 20:25, 20 October 2015 (UTC)