Jump to content

Wikipedia:Media copyright questions: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Ugomatrix (talk | contribs)
43 edits
←Blanked the page
Line 1: Line 1:
{{active editnotice}} <!-- See [[Wikipedia:Editnotice]] -->
<div style="position: absolute; top: 0.3em; right: 0.3em; border: 1px solid #a9a9a9; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 1px; background: #FFFFFF;" class="boilerplate metadata plainlinks"><small>[[#footer|Skip to the bottom]]</small></div>

{{Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Header}}

<!-- Please don't move the category links to the bottom, I know it's the norm, but in this case this would cause them to get "bumped" by new questions and possibly archived by mistake or otherwise lost -->

[[Category:Wikipedia copyright|Media copyright questions, Wikipedia]]
[[Category:Wikipedia image help|Media copyright questions, Wikipedia]]
[[Category:Wikipedia help forums|Media copyright questions, Wikipedia]]
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]

__NEWSECTIONLINK__
<!--

PLEASE DO NOT ADD QUESTIONS HERE. ADD THEM TO THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE, INSTEAD. THANKS!

-->

{{AutoArchivingNotice|bot=MiszaBot II|age=7}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo = old(7d)
|archive = Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/%(year)d/%(monthname)s
}}

== NFS images ==

I found a nice [http://photolibrary.usap.gov/index.htm Antarctic Photo Library] by the [[United States Antarctic Program]]. The library which consists of images credited to [[National Science Foundation]] states that [http://photolibrary.usap.gov/information.htm ''No one may reproduce the photos for personal or commercial profit, use the photos on products for sale (i.e., t-shirts, coffee mugs) or use the photos for advertisement without express permission from the photographer. To obtain contact information for a photographer, contact the Photo Librarian.''] Are photographs credited to NSF in public domain? I'd like to know if we could port the library to the commons or Wikipedia.[[User:Smallman12q|Smallman12q]] ([[User talk:Smallman12q|talk]]) 15:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
:Anyone?...[[User:Smallman12q|Smallman12q]] ([[User talk:Smallman12q|talk]]) 13:28, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

== American town flags/symbols/insignia ==

How can a flag not be free-use? They're meant to be seen and used, the idea of a flag not being free-use seems unreasonable, especially in the US where almost everything made by or for government-related usage is free. Any way I was asked on my talk page about [[:File:US Chula-Vista flag.svg|these]] [[:File:US_Chula-Vista_logo.svg|files]]. Are town symbols free? --[[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="727A96">I'ḏ</font>]][[User_talk:IdLoveOne|<font color="FF4C52">'''♥'''</font>]][[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="4F5DFF">One</font>]] 23:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

:US Federal government has free works, local and state governments typically exert control over their images. In this instance it does not appear that these symbols are free. [[User:Stepshep|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;color:#617c58;">§hep</span>]][[User talk:Stepshep|<span style="font-family:Helvetica;color:#617c58;"><sup>Talk</sup></span>]] 01:46, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

::Is there any real rule that says a flag isn't free? If the flag was created, approved and claimed by the town then the image replicator can't claim much ownership of these uploads. --[[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="727A96">I'ḏ</font>]][[User_talk:IdLoveOne|<font color="FF4C52">'''♥'''</font>]][[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="4F5DFF">One</font>]] 03:24, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
::*Rule? No. Law? Yes. Copyright law. Within the U.S., whether you display a flag only indoors in a private office our outdoors on a flag pole makes no difference. Copyright is, for many years now, conferred on creation of an original work. A flag qualifies. There's no special application required to gain copyright. It's automatic. Until such time as we have proof of release under a free license or public domain, then a local or state government can claim rights. --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 12:59, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
:::*These flags weren't released to Wikimedia by the town. One is from a travel site, the other apparently an advertising company, therefore they're not even apart of the government that is using these flags. --[[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="727A96">I'ḏ</font>]][[User_talk:IdLoveOne|<font color="FF4C52">'''♥'''</font>]][[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="4F5DFF">One</font>]] 13:44, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
::::*And? --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 14:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
:::::*''And'' in that case how are either of those above websites eligible to decide what the copyright of the flags are? ''And'' why are we just assuming that insignia is under a copyright if its "owners," presumably the town, don't seem to make any effort to demonstrate that they have, claim or even want their logos copywritten? For instance, no one seems to have dome so on a big city's flag like [[:File:Flag_of_New_York_City.svg|New York's]] and if it was under copyright it should require fair use, shouldn't it? And that would severely cut the number of pages linking to it, as it would the [[:File:Flag_of_the_United_States.svg|USA's flag]]. The concept of a flag being copywritten also makes me wonder about the subject of [[flag burning]]. ''And'' isn't the usage of a flag, since it's a represenative symbol the same as giving credit of that flag; For instance, if a US flag is placed somewhere, isn't that essentially as though the flag itself contains the USA's "signature" since the flag is meant to represent the USA? --[[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="727A96">I'ḏ</font>]][[User_talk:IdLoveOne|<font color="FF4C52">'''♥'''</font>]][[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="4F5DFF">One</font>]] 15:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
{{od}}
*Regardless of where the images were grabbed from, the original creators (usually) is the actual source and rights holder. The place where the images were grabbed might have permission to use the images from the rights holder. Doesn't matter in any case. We assume things are copyrighted because in the U.S. things are automatically copyrighted at the moment of creation. That's law. Any given web site doesn't have to explicitly state their material is copyrighted in order to enjoy the protections of copyright. If you want to ask the rights holder for release of an image under a free licenses, follow the directions at [[Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission]]. Note that getting permission to use on Wikipedia is insufficient, and such images are routinely deleted (see [[Wikipedia:CSD#F3]]). As for the Flag of NYC, it is public domain by way of age. Things created prior to 1923 are generally (not always, but generally) in the public domain by way of law with respect to age. That's the case with this flag. See [[Government_of_New_York_City#Official_seal_and_flag]]. The licensing on Commons is actually incorrect, but still a free license nonetheless. The remaining issues in your post do not pertain to copyrights, though I will say that whether something is copyrighted or not does not affect whether it can be burned or not under law. --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 15:44, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
**"''We assume things are copyrighted because in the U.S. things are automatically copyrighted at the moment of creation. That's law.''" Not quite, almost anything made by a US federal [[Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/USA|government agency]], ex: The white house, NASA, Department of Agricultural, a branch of the military is ''instantly public domain'' unless stated otherwise, which is what makes me wonder if things created by more local government areas are free, in fact [[:Template:PD-CAGov|THIS]] seems to prove that the flag and seal of the town I was asked about is in the public domain. --[[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="727A96">I'ḏ</font>]][[User_talk:IdLoveOne|<font color="FF4C52">'''♥'''</font>]][[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="4F5DFF">One</font>]] 16:21, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

***It varies from state to state and the ky words you used are ''unless stated otherwise''. That can amount to an awful lot. For example in Florida state university are allowed to obtain, and retain, trademarked logos. As are any state agency that needs a logo ''in connection with the sale within this state of goods or services''. A state police department may also be able to due to ''the misuse or deceptive use of state agency seals or logos''. In specif regards to California - [http://www.sos.ca.gov/business/ts/ Trademarks and Service Marks] suggests trademarks are allowed - ''The Secretary of State’s office maintains registration and all updates of California state trademarks and service marks.'' For more on that, the [http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=bpc&codebody=&hits=All California Business and Professions Code], in particular the [http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=bpc&group=14001-15000&file=14200-14202 Model State Trademark Law], has details.

::Also I think a lot of people get confused in regards to a trademark/logo and copyright. According to the US Copyright office ''copyright protection may be available for logo artwork that contains sufficient authorship. In some circumstances, an artistic logo may also be protected as a trademark.'' A lot of the boiler plate gov temples in use go off the broader "It's PD" concept without bothering to specify there may be exceptions in regards to logos/trademarks. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 16:59, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
*IdLoveOne; I was speaking to the abstract not the specific, attempting to educate you on the matter. Of course there are exceptions. There's exceptions to just about every law under the sun. That's not the point. You were apparently of the belief that we need to find proof of copyright before we can assert something is non-free. That's backwards. I hope you understand that now. --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 17:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
**To above - I'm still not convinced. Firstly, does a flag qualify as a logo? That seems to me to come close to comparing a government to a business. According to the SOS page a "registration" only lasts 10 years max, so if this is older than that does that clear everything up? Nextly, yeah, if you want to join a WikiProject to relabel each and every license template, go ahead, but I think most people know the exception/loophole thing about most laws. I'm gonna have to try and get some real clarification. And no, I listed a bunch of reasons above for my feelings. If it was a photograph a person has a right to decide what happens with their image or work, privacy.. Or a piece of recently created artwork I could understand, but the design of a government flag is made to be public and I would assume the artist(s) release the design to the community in question. --[[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="727A96">I'ḏ</font>]][[User_talk:IdLoveOne|<font color="FF4C52">'''♥'''</font>]][[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="4F5DFF">One</font>]] 19:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
***All I can tell you, as I've said above, is that your assertions regarding things intended to be put into the public eye are false. LOTS of things are intended to be displayed in front of the public, yet carry copyright. Just because something is to be public doesn't mean people automatically waive their copyrights. For example, sculptures displayed in public places in this country can maintain copyright, even on photographs taken of them. See {{tl|Non-free 3D art}}. Whether or not something is displayed publicly has absolutely NO effect on whether it is copyrighted or copyrightable. A particular thing might be free of copyright due to other considerations, but not in any sense because it happens to be in a public place (the exception here being in the U.S.; architectural works, but that's not the case in every country). Flags are no special exception to copyright law. An entity that otherwise is not required to vacate copyright on works they create can create a flag and maintain copyright on it. I'm sorry we have failed you in conveying to you that this is the case. Feel free to explore other options for having this explained to you. However, I can assure you that such efforts will not result in a different result than the one being explained to you here. Many flags can and are copyrighted. --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 19:37, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

== Does this site follow your sharing policy? ==

I was looking on the web and I found this web site mirrored your information and I did not see attribution to Wiki. It looked copied.


http://closefocusresearch.com/22-long-rifle <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.184.229.112|76.184.229.112]] ([[User talk:76.184.229.112|talk]]) 03:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:It says "Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" at the bottom of the page.[[User:Smallman12q|Smallman12q]] ([[User talk:Smallman12q|talk]]) 13:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

== Uploading an image to Wikipedia page ==

Hi,

I would like to upload an updated image of thin film to the Wikipedia page entitled 'Thin Film Drug Delivery.' I do not own the image, but I work on behalf of the company that does. What approval / credentials do I need to produce in order for Wikipedia to allow me to upload this image of thin film?

Also, can you provide me with a simplified explanation of the steps required to upload the image once I obtain the necessary permissions / licenses / credentials for the image?

Thanks! <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ereiss|Ereiss]] ([[User talk:Ereiss|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ereiss|contribs]]) 15:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Go to [[Wikipedia:Upload]] to upload an image to ''this'' Wiki, or you can go to the [[main page]] to see links on your left to other language Wikis where you can upload it or you can upload it to [[:commons:main page|Commons]] which is inter-lingual (the link to the upload page should be in the second >carrot marked 'Toolbox', Commons might not be best in the cases of some images due to different copyright laws in different countries, though Commons is usually the preferred route, that link will be in >Participate also on your left. You'll see that [[:File:Ed0012.jpg|most images]] on Wikipedia are uploaded or have been moved to Commons - Note the statement "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons..."). That and an account is all you need to upload the image, though, yes, you will have to state ownership and possibly prove you're allowed to upload it or it could be nominated for deletion. When you upload a file there's a form you fill out that'll show the name, author, source etc. [[Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags|Here]] are some English Wikipedia copyright tags, [[:Commons:Copyright_tags|here]] are some for Commons (because they're different projects they generally don't work interchangeably, but the tags will be shown on any language Wiki page of the image). I hope I explained that well enough, let me know if I didn't. --[[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="727A96">I'ḏ</font>]][[User_talk:IdLoveOne|<font color="FF4C52">'''♥'''</font>]][[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="4F5DFF">One</font>]] 15:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Based on your comment (''I do not own the image, but I work on behalf of the company that does.'') the answer to your question is, before you upload the image, have the copyright holder send an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org (if you are uploading it here) using the sample template found at [[Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries|Declaration of consent for all enquiries]]. Make sure you list the name of the file, as it will be uploaded. Use a unique name - not just "Filexyz_123.jpg"ot the like. *After* this email is sent, upload the image and place a {{tl|OTRS pending}} tag on the image page. I advise you to use the template found at the [[Wikipedia:Uploading_images#Mini_how-to|"Mini how-to"]] and than place the tag next to "Permission". When an OTRS team member reads it you will get a reply with a ticket number. If you upload the image after this reply you can tag the image with {{tl|PermissionOTRS|ticket=TICKET NUMBER}}. If there are any questions please drop me a not on my talk page. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 16:33, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

== Pax cultura logo ==

[[File:Pax cultura.svg|thumb|right|60px|The Pax cultura symbol]]
The description page for [[:File:Pax cultura.svg]] states that the image is "a logo of an organization, item, or event, and is protected by copyright", but I can find no evidence that this is the case. I think this is most likely an ancient and un-copyrightable symbol, and the warning can be removed. --[[User:Doradus|Doradus]] ([[User talk:Doradus|talk]]) 16:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
:Looks like a '''[[∴]]''' --[[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="727A96">I'ḏ</font>]][[User_talk:IdLoveOne|<font color="FF4C52">'''♥'''</font>]][[User:IdLoveOne|<font color="4F5DFF">One</font>]] 20:38, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

::Without question this logo is ineligible for copyright being composed of a simple circle and three dots, so should be licenced as {{tl|PD-ineligible}}, {{tl|PD-shape}} or even {{tl|PD-textlogo}} but in respect of its use by an organisation should be tagged with the {{tl|trademark}} template and the fair-use rationale can be changes for a simple information template. [[User:Ww2censor|ww2censor]] ([[User talk:Ww2censor|talk]]) 21:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

:::Ok thanks for your opinion. I'll make the changes you suggest. I'm also dubious that this is a trademark, but it can't hurt to err on the side of caution. --[[User:Doradus|Doradus]] ([[User talk:Doradus|talk]]) 13:06, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

::::However there is no source information, etc., so please fill in as best you can, the missing data. Thanks [[User:Ww2censor|ww2censor]] ([[User talk:Ww2censor|talk]]) 12:20, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

:::::Ok. I did a Google search for "pax cultura", browsed the resulting pictures, and then drew our image file from scratch, making it look like a kind of "average" of the images I found. Not very scientific. Do I need to do something more than what I've already done on the file's [[:File:Pax cultura.svg|page]]? --[[User:Doradus|Doradus]] ([[User talk:Doradus|talk]]) 12:59, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

::::::So just say that you made the image based on other images found online. [[User:Ww2censor|ww2censor]] ([[User talk:Ww2censor|talk]]) 14:18, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Ok, done. Thanks again. --[[User:Doradus|Doradus]] ([[User talk:Doradus|talk]]) 18:25, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

== COPYRIGHT QUESTION: WOLFRAM AICHELE ==

I have just been informed that the pictures used on the entry for Wolfra Aichele page are at risk of deletion because I neglected to put a copyright tag on them. Help! Wolfram Aichele owns the copyright for all images that begin WOLFRAM-AICHELE. Please can someone add a copyright tag to these so that they do NOT get deleted.
Thanks.
MisterHistory. {{Unsigned|Misterhistory|13:01, 9 September 2010 }}


:I just noticed this on my watchlist and it appears from the above that Misterhistory isn't clear what the situation is (or maybe is clear as he reverted it just after he wrote it, and I'm putting it back). It looks as though the files he uploaded, eg [[:File:WOLFRAM-AICHELE-PARIS.jpg]] are copyright. So perhaps they should be deleted until and if someone releases the copyright? [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 12:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

== Have I done this right? ==

[[:File:Dernier-mohican-giffeu-delagrave_1937.jpg]]
The person who uploaded it claims to be the creator of the image, which seems highly unlikely as it's the cover of a 1937 French copy of the Last of the Mohicans, and I don't think he's a nonagenarian. I think it's a good faith error in that I believe he photographed the book cover, although it's unlikely to be PD unless the creator died shortly after the book was published. The image is on Commons - I've warned the uploader that he needs to have another look, and maybe move it to en.wiki where it may be possible to use it under our non-free content rules. Have I tagged it correctly - I don't understand Commons tagging at all? --[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 13:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

:Well, yes and no - as the file is not at Wikipedia but [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dernier-mohican-giffeu-delagrave_1937.jpg Commons] the deletion tag here doesn't really do anything. The deletion process there is very different than here as well. You are correct however in that the uploader is most likely *not* the author of the artwork, nor representing the books publisher. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 13:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

::Urk. That figures. I kind of hoped if you tagged it here it would transclude there. Do you know what tag I need to add to the Commons image? --[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 13:30, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

:::I have already done it. You can read about the Commons deletion process here: [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_policy Commons:Deletion Policy]. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 13:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
::::Thanks --[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 13:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

== I can't understand why there is a problem with the copywrite for my image ==

I recently uploaded [[:File:LogoBrumHums.jpg]] to Wikipedia Commons and clearly stated that I created the logo and own the copywrite and that I am happy for other people to use it. I can't understand what else I need to do.
Can somebody help please?

John Edwards signyred <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/94.173.105.249|94.173.105.249]] ([[User talk:94.173.105.249|talk]]) 13:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:You would need to being that question to Commons if you also uploaded it there. (Although I cannot find any image with that name at Commons) The version here was deleted August 14 as ''F4: Lack of licensing information''. You may want to read the [[Wikipedia:Uploading_images#Mini_how-to|Mini how-to]] guide and use the suggested template next time you upload an image. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 13:46, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

== Replacing an image with a better version and copyright concern ==

Hello, checking on the presence of a paiting I have seen this morning in the Prado Museum in Madrid I have confirmed it is available in a rather blurry version here https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/File:Cornelius_van_Dalem_001.jpg. I found a much better version here http://www.kalipedia.com/literatura-universal/tema/prosa-renacentista-ficcion.html?x=20070418klplylliu_80.Kes . Would it be ok for me to replace the present verion with this one or would I be breaking some sacred copyright law written at the time of Moses? The painting itself must be in the public domain as the author died in the 16th century...--[[User:Rowanwindwhistler|Rowanwindwhistler]] ([[User talk:Rowanwindwhistler|talk]]) 18:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

:The painting itself may be in PD but whoever took the image may not have placed their image of it into PD. A quick look at the [http://www.kalipedia.com/literatura-universal/tema/prosa-renacentista-ficcion.html?x=20070418klplylliu_80.Kes second link] has ''© Prisacom S.L.- Gran Vía, 32 - 28013 Madrid [España] Tel. 91 353 79 00'' at the bottom of the page. I would contact them to see what the image license is before uploading it here. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 18:26, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

::Actually, if the photo is a "slavish reproduction" of the painting, then the photo is not sufficiently creative to be copyrightable on its own, and would therefore be PD just like the painting. --[[User:Doradus|Doradus]] ([[User talk:Doradus|talk]]) 20:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

:::Not sure what you are saying - last time I checked Madrid was in Spain and the website this image in on is in Spain, and a photographer in Spain, or from Spain, holds the copyright to the images they take anywhere in the world. It doesn't matter if the the picture is of a reproduction of a PD painting - the picture of it is still available for copyright in Spain. My suggestion to [[User:Rowanwindwhistler|Rowanwindwhistler]] is still valid - contact the person/business in the copyright notice. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 22:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
::::And Wikipedia's servers are in the US. Generally speaking, for images that are simply reproductions of 2 dimensional PD works of art, we allow them to be uploaded and tagged {{tl|PD-Art}} or the equivalent tag on the Commons. Commons has a page about that, and calls out Spain and the UK for their attacks on the general notion of a "public domain". [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:When_to_use_the_PD-Art_tag] This is a special rule, because in most other PD cases, to be hosted on the Commons they must be PD in the US and the originating country (otherwise, they must only be uploaded to en.wiki). However, reproductions of otherwise PD works of 2D art are a special case that Wikipedia has decided to take a stand on. -[[User:Andrew c|Andrew&nbsp;c]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Andrew c|<sup>[talk]</sup>]] 22:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
:::::Andrew I think you are missing something - the image being talked about is not yet at Wikipedia - that is the whole question. We can't take photographs form the internet and upload it here using the reason that "Well, it's now located in the US so therefore it is PD-Art". By the same token I can't take a photograph of, say, a TV that has [[American Idol]] on it and claim it as my own - the photo, yes, the subject matter of the photo - no. A new painting of Mickey Mouse that the artist says releases to PD does not change the fact that if a photo of it is taken that photos copyright is owned by the photographer and that the subject matter - Mickey Mouse - is still owned by Disney. We don't go "No it's {{tl|PD-Art}}" simply because, as the tag says, ''The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin''. As with many of the other PD tags in use it takes too broad of a stroke. PD = PD, yes. I am not saying it isn't. But there would be a huge difference between, say, [[:File:Mona-lisa-through-glass.jpg]], [[:File:Mona Lisa Louvre.jpg]], [[:File:Mona Lisa versão .JPG]], [[:File:Carnival Rio Mona Lisa costume.jpg]] and [[:File:Mona_Lisa.jpeg]]. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 23:05, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
::::::In the US, everyone can agree that ''Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp'' found that "a photograph which is no more than a copy of a work of another" does not contain "originality" and thus a slavish photographic reproduction of a 2D piece of art that is in the public domain would also be in the public domain. This would not apply to any of your Mona Lisa examples except one, because none, except the one, are slavish reproductions. We acknowledge that in some jurisdictions (Spain, UK, etc), there laws allow new copyrights to be claimed on such slavish photographic reproductions. However, it is our guidelines that '''Nevertheless, under Commons rules the {{tl|PD-Art}} tag can be used for "faithful reproduction" photographs of 2D public domain works of art even where copyright might be asserted under local law in the source country.''' This is a rare case were we are taking a stand (and perhaps throwing in a little civil disobedience). Is there a question on whether the image in question is a "faithful reproduction" or not? Otherwise, it is fine to upload, even if it may be technically a copyright violation in Spain. -[[User:Andrew c|Andrew&nbsp;c]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Andrew c|<sup>[talk]</sup>]] 00:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Soundvisions1 is generally correct here. It is a regular misunderstanding that if something cannot be copyrighted under US law it is therefore PD because Wikipedia's servers are in the US. This is not the case if the image actually IS copyright in another country. However, in the particular case of "slavish reproductions of 2d artwork" (ie a photo just of the painting, that doesn't show the frame, the wall it's hanging on etc), the WMF itself seems to have elected to follow US law and oppose attempts by organisations such as the [[National Gallery]] in England to claim copyright on photographs of paintings in their collections. So in this case, Andrewc is correct that the image can be uploaded as PD.[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 14:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks for offering a 3O. I want to apologize if I wasn't clear. I wasn't trying to imply that we only follow US laws being on US soil. We explicitly do not allow content on the Commons which may be out of copyright in the US, but not in other countries (outside of the 2D art thing mentioned above). Some cases, it's ok to upload to en.wiki, but not Commons. Some cases, its not OK, unless it's a fair use claim. -[[User:Andrew c|Andrew&nbsp;c]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Andrew c|<sup>[talk]</sup>]] 15:38, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
::Apologies equally if I misunderstood what you were saying and put the wrong words at your fingertips (it happens, it happens). At least we agree on the outcome in this case and gain a better image thereby :) [[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 15:42, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

== is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Territories_1850_alt.jpg really pd-old? ==

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Territories_1850_alt.jpg looks like a Hammond map from the 1970s. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/128.237.231.4|128.237.231.4]] ([[User talk:128.237.231.4|talk]]) 23:45, 9 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Look under the map. It says 1967 and Hammond on it, then revised by USGeoSurv in 1970, so you are correct that it is not pd-old. Maybe the copyright wasn't renewed, maybe it was a work of the US government, and thus it may still be PD. But, unless you have further information regarding the original copyright, I'd recommend nominating it for deletion on the Commons. Since the file is hosted there, there is nothing we can do here (otherwise, I would have recommended taking it to [[WP:PUI]]). -[[User:Andrew c|Andrew&nbsp;c]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Andrew c|<sup>[talk]</sup>]] 00:11, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
::A fresh issue by US GeoSurvey might make it PD, as I believe that is a federal organisation, but only if Hammond was not claiming copyright also as a derivative work. --[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 14:23, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

== Help with find non-free images ==

:(Moved from help desk)
I'd like to add images to the article [[Murder of Victoria Climbié]] but I'm not sure on the rules and how to go about it. There's a bunch of images [http://www.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&q=victoria%20climbie&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=864&bih=404 here] but am I allowed to just upload them under the free use criteria? I'd like to add pictures of Victoria (the child, now dead), more than one if possible, her two former guardians (both in prison), her parents, and [[Lord Laming]], the person in charge of the inquiry following her death. Can someone advise on which are allowed and which aren't and what the best way of obtaining these images is? [[User:Christopher Connor|Christopher Connor]] ([[User talk:Christopher Connor|talk]]) 13:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
:NO, you are not allowed to upload them all under Wikipedia's [[WP:NFCC|non-free content policy]]. First you need to check to see if there are free images of the imprisoned parents or Lord Laming. If there are, you should use them. If you can find no free images, you may not use non-free ones. You can upload one non-free image of the child, as it is unlikely that a free image exists (although you still must check first) - you could possibly also get away with the photograph of her injuries, if the photograph formed part of the discussion of those injuries.--[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 14:31, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
::Thanks for the reply. Can I ask how do you check for free images? [[User:Christopher Connor|Christopher Connor]] ([[User talk:Christopher Connor|talk]]) 14:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
::I have searched Commons for you and cannot find anything useful. Your best bet is to search upload sites such as Flikr, also in this case check sites associated with the case, as they may have pd images. Note that the image must actually have been released on a pd license, not just appear on a site without any attribution. Others will probably have more suggestions as to good places to search.--[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 15:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

:::I've uploaded [[:File:Victoria Climbié.jpg|an image]]. Can someone check this is acceptable? Would also like [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2062590.stm this]. [[User:Christopher Connor|Christopher Connor]] ([[User talk:Christopher Connor|talk]]) 16:10, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

::::[[:File:Victoria Climbié.jpg]] needs a fair-use rationale (see [[WP:FURG]]) otherwise it will be deleted. The BBC image is easily replaceable by a simple drawing someone can make, so you can even claim it under fair use. [[User:Ww2censor|ww2censor]] ([[User talk:Ww2censor|talk]]) 16:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
:::::You mean can't? I've now provided a "FUR". Please have a look to see if it satisfies the policies. [[User:Christopher Connor|Christopher Connor]] ([[User talk:Christopher Connor|talk]]) 17:09, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
::::::I didn't realize this was being discussed here as well. I answered your quesiton on my talk page. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 18:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

== License status - Help! ==

Hi there
I have received a message regarding the recently uploaded file: Holly Kenyon at The Cannes Film Festival 2010.JPG
Apparently I have not indicated the license status of the image, which I probably have done in error as I find the whole process kinda confusing!
I have tried and failed to follow the instructions given but am none the wiser on how to do it.
Can you please instruct me through this?
I took the photo of the actress myself and am giving full permission for it to be used on Wikipedia.
If it is still not appropriate, can you tell me how anyone ever gets a photo of actors onto Wikipedia???
Thank you
5litres <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:5litres|5litres]] ([[User talk:5litres|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/5litres|contribs]]) 18:00, 10 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:The most common would be the {{tl|Cc-by-sa-3.0}} license. I suggest reading the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ overview] as well as [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode the full legal code] so you understand what rights you have under the license. Also just a few suggestions - for "source" I would put down some informaiton about the camera rather than "I created this work entirely by myself." With a lot of pre-published images the "source" might be the magazine, paper or website it came from. In your case it appears to come straight form your camera. And for "Author" I would put down your full name. This goes along with the license which allows you to specify attribution (Photo credit). On the other hand if you only want "5litres" as the credit that is fine as well. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 18:17, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for all your help. I really appreciate it. I will have another go at this!!
5litres <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:5litres|5litres]] ([[User talk:5litres|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/5litres|contribs]]) 18:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Photo of Jose Luis Orozco - Question? ==

I would like to use the photo of Jose Luis Orozco from the link/page below on the wiki page i created about Jose Luis Orozco.

http://www.blaineschools.org/Userfiles/Schools/Bellevue/News/SVCA%20%20Event.jpg

Would this be considered a free photo? What steps would I need to take to put in on article.

[[User:Hhfreund|Hhfreund]] ([[User talk:Hhfreund|talk]]) 06:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
:I cannot see any evidence that it is free, unless you can see a statement about the copyright of the iamge assume that no free license is granted. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 10:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

== [[Razer (robot)]] update ==

Hello again,

Forgive me starting a new thread so soon after [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions/Archive/2010/September#Potential_photos_for_Razer_.28robot.29_-_can_they_only_ever_be_fair_use.3F my last one] was archived, but no sooner did Miszabot II do its thing than I received an update on the potential free photos for use on the [[Razer (robot)]] article. To recap, I have recently helped to rewrite this page from something which was thrice on AfD to, hopefully, a soon-to-be GA candidate. Since I last posted on here, one of the roboteers who constructed Razer has allowed me to upload three great images of his machine to the Commons under [[WP:CC-BY-SA]] - they are currently pending for an OTRS ticket, with a written declaration of consent emailed to the OTRS team a couple of days ago.

Since then, a Flickr user who I contacted has agreed to release one of his photos of Razer under CC-BY-SA. As [[User:Elen of the Roads]] kindly explained last time, he could not do so as he does not own the copyright of the robot, and his photo would be considered a derivative work of this. Perhaps I could ask a couple of questions:
# Given that the robot constructor behind Razer has been happy to help, could he in any way allow us to use the photo?
# Otherwise, could the photo be uploaded to Wikipedia (as opposed to the Commons) under CC-BY-SA, but with a fair use tag explaining that the photo is free but the robot's design is not?
Thank you in advance for your help - again!

Best wishes, [[User:CountdownCrispy|<span style="color:#556;">'''''Countdown'''''</span><span style="color:#778">'''''Crispy'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:CountdownCrispy|☎]] [[Special:Contributions/CountdownCrispy|✎]]</sup> 11:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
:You could certainly ask the robot constructor if he's ok with the Flickr image being used. Then you have covered all bases. As to uploading to Wikipedia under a [[WP:NFCC|Fair use rationale]], the problem is that it would probably fail, since the non-free image is potentially replaceable by a free one (provided by the robot constructor). [[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 23:36, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
::Would it need 'signing off' via an OTRS declaration or similar? Thanks again for your help, [[User:CountdownCrispy|<span style="color:#556;">'''''Countdown'''''</span><span style="color:#778">'''''Crispy'''''</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:CountdownCrispy|☎]] [[Special:Contributions/CountdownCrispy|✎]]</sup> 08:09, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

== Paper cutting ==

/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Manava_vijayam_copy.jpg
sir i had uploded a paper cutting of akathakali programme .it is from the news paper(deshabhimani,daily)' now the uploded item is going to be deleted. how can i overcome this issue?please help me.
[[User:Mohanantirur|Mohanantirur]] ([[User talk:Mohanantirur|talk]]) 11:40, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
:Basically you will have to tell us where the picture came from, which newspaper, which country, which date and page, and who is credited as the photographer. The Creative commons license looks wrong unless it was you who took the photo. Either the newspaper is old enough to be public domain, or we probably cannot use the picture. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 10:47, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

== Susan Cinoman ==

Hi, I'm Susan Cinoman, the person about whom the article '[[Susan Cinoman]]" is written. A photo of [[Suzanne Sommers]] has been posted indicating that this is me, and it's not. I am happy to provide a photo of myself for this article. Thank you! Susan Cinoman <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.44.59.235|24.44.59.235]] ([[User talk:24.44.59.235|talk]]) 15:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
by SineBot-->

:I've looked at images of both and agree that the image is more likely to be of Suzanne Sommers. I've removed it but what do we do about the image? [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 11:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

::Well, Susan Cinoman could upload a photograph of herself no problem. Very kind offer in fact. The other image could perhaps be listed for deletion as we can't be sure who it is?? At the very least, it needs the information on it changing. --[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 23:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


:::The other image seems to have vanished. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 20:32, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

== [[:File:WOLFRAM-AICHELE-WOOD-CARVING.jpg]] - low resolution? ==

I'm not clear what we mean by low resolution, does this qualify? Thanks [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 10:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
:There is nothing wrong with the resolution however granting use on Wikipedia is an invalid license for use here. We either need a free license like [[CC-BY-SA-3.0]] or a [[WP:Fair use rationale|Fair use rationale]] with valid justification. Wolfram Aichele could grant free use of the photo without granting any permissions on other photos or reproductions of the sculpture. It also looks as if there were problems with [[:File:WOLFRAM-AICHELE-ICON.jpg]] and [[:File:WOLFRAM-AICHELE-PARIS.jpg]]. For fair use there will need to be discussion about the photo in the text, so that it enhances understanding of the subject, otherwise use is not fair. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 10:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


::Thanks, where do we go from here? I posted to the editor on the 10th asking if he wanted advice on copyright and he didn't reply, and this was uploaded on the 12th. If Aichele grants free use of this photo here, I presume anyone, say, publishing the article in a book can use it so long as they complied with our license? That's my understanding and what I told the editor. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 11:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

== Upload another person's picture ==

I would like to upload a picture of Kenneth Kamal Scott in the full Wiz makeup that he created. What do I need to do?

Thank you very much. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ermarie|Ermarie]] ([[User talk:Ermarie|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ermarie|contribs]]) 18:51, 12 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:There are two requirements that have to be followed, and possibly other requirements. First, the picture must follow the privacy requirements at [[WP:IUP#Privacy rights]]. Next, the ''photographer'' or other person to whom the copyright has been assigned must grant an appropriate copyright license. See [[WP:IUP#Adding images]]. Finally, there may be other issues connected with the makeup that I am not qualified to discuss. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 20:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

== Use of [[Press Association]] images ==

The deletion debate at [[Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_September_11#File:Victoria_Climbi.C3.A9.jpg]] is turning rather personal - could some of the knowledgeable people at this board offer an opinion as I think more voices on all sides could perhaps defuse the situation. In short, it concerns the use of a [[Press Association]] image in an infobox. Thanks for your help. --[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 22:30, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

== Una and the Lion ==

I uploaded [[:File:Una and the Lion.JPG]] from Spink.com. I'm wondering which copyright tag is applicable to this picture.--[[User:intelati|<font color="#FD0000">in</font><font color="#FF5500">te</font><font color="#FF8000">la</font><font color="#FFC000">ti</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:intelati|Call]])</sup> 01:13, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:Unhappily, it is not a free license. A coin is not two dimensional, so you can't say it is a faithful reproduction of a work of art. You might want to ask Spink for permission. This has come up repeatedly as I've tried to improve the coverage of US numismatics. Beautiful coin. I am not sure of the fine points of this piece, was it ever officially currency, or just a pattern? If it was just a pattern, you should instead base the tag for the artwork be the artist being dead 70 years. So you need two tags, one for the photo, one for the coin.--[[User:Wehwalt|Wehwalt]] ([[User talk:Wehwalt|talk]]) 01:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

::The coin is British, from 1839 and it was actual currency. [[Una and the Lion|Here]] is my (new) article where the image is.--[[User:intelati|<font color="#FD0000">in</font><font color="#FF5500">te</font><font color="#FF8000">la</font><font color="#FFC000">ti</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:intelati|Call]])</sup> 01:25, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:::I'm aware it is British; you still need a tag for the photograph, and as a coin is a three dimensional object, you can't use PD-ART.--[[User:Wehwalt|Wehwalt]] ([[User talk:Wehwalt|talk]]) 01:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

::::I already have the Non-Free Fair use tag and rational for the image.--[[User:intelati|<font color="#FD0000">in</font><font color="#FF5500">te</font><font color="#FF8000">la</font><font color="#FFC000">ti</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:intelati|Call]])</sup> 01:29, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:::::That is good. Still, free use is better and so you might want to email Spink. or see if there is another image someone is willing to release. Bit pricey to get hold of yourself!--[[User:Wehwalt|Wehwalt]] ([[User talk:Wehwalt|talk]]) 01:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

::::::Alright, the email is sent. What should I do if they accept the offer? If they refuse, what should I do?--[[User:intelati|<font color="#FD0000">in</font><font color="#FF5500">te</font><font color="#FF8000">la</font><font color="#FFC000">ti</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:intelati|Call]])</sup> 01:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
:::::::If they accept, there is a procedure whereby you forward the email to OTRS and they will put a tag on the page indicating confirmation of the license. I will happily advise you as to the nuts and bolts of that if you get a positive response, come to my talk page and let me know. If they say no, or if they don't respond, there may be other possibilities. Check around for other images, especially those of coins in public hands, and make similar requests. Images can be a pain sometimes! My talk page is always open for ''any'' questions, not just about images, I've written one or two articles on the wiki and now and then someone says something nice about them. Besides, my advice is free, and worth every penny!--[[User:Wehwalt|Wehwalt]] ([[User talk:Wehwalt|talk]]) 01:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

::::::::Ha, Nice pun, and I will do that. At least it's fair use so we can use that right now. --[[User:intelati|<font color="#FD0000">in</font><font color="#FF5500">te</font><font color="#FF8000">la</font><font color="#FFC000">ti</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:intelati|Call]])</sup> 02:00, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
:::::::::No problem. If I recall correctly, Gibraltar reused the design for a gold piece a few years ago. You might want to mention that.--[[User:Wehwalt|Wehwalt]] ([[User talk:Wehwalt|talk]]) 02:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

== Paintings and "Life of author plus 70 years" ==

Hello. Does a painting from ~1840 need a source that the painter died before 1940 to be PD? The file in question is [[:File:Philip_Bliss.jpg]] which is used in an featured list candidate. At the FAC image review one of the reviewers often request a source asserting the authors death, so I wanted to find out if there is a rule of thumb like for paintings before 1870 all are PD or something? [[User:Sandman888|Sandman888]] ([[User talk:Sandman888|talk]]) 10:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

: Was it John Bridges (active 1818-1854), painter and draughtsman? {{Cite|first=John|last=Bridges|title=Biography|publisher=[[National_Portrait_Gallery_(London)|National Portrait Gallery]]|year=2010|url=http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/person.php?search=sa&sText=j+bridges&LinkID=mp88545&role=art}} --[[User:Senra|Senra]] ([[User Talk:Senra|Talk]]) 19:11, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:: Yes but the crux of the question really is whether you need hard evidence that the author died there and then or it just have to be likely (hence the unwritten rule of thumb). If I search for images I would like not to go through "possible unfree file" every time they are uploaded. Cheerio, [[User:Sandman888|Sandman888]] ([[User talk:Sandman888|talk]]) 19:15, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

::: I am at a loss here. What harder evidence do you need when you have a reliable source stating ''John Bridges (active 1818-1854)''; that the sum of 1818 plus 122 = 1940 and the [[Oldest_people|highly unlikely]] event of John Bridges living past 122? Even that is assuming he was ''active'' in his very very early years :) --[[User:Senra|Senra]] ([[User Talk:Senra|Talk]]) 20:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:::: Hard evidence is a source saying he died in 1878 (e.g.). What you are doing is speculating that he must have died earlier than 1940. That is fine, but is that an official policy to consider ''all'' paintings from before, say 1860 which would put them in a similar situation, PD? [[User:Sandman888|Sandman888]] ([[User talk:Sandman888|talk]]) 20:09, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:::::According to the 1851 Census of Oxford (John Bridges, Portrait Painter) he was 47 so he was born in 1803/1804. [[User:MilborneOne|MilborneOne]] ([[User talk:MilborneOne|talk]]) 20:44, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:::::: That is not my question. My question is: ''is there an official policy to consider ''all'' paintings made before 1860, or some other year, PD?'' [[User:Sandman888|Sandman888]] ([[User talk:Sandman888|talk]]) 07:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

== II don't know how solve the problem. I received the photo from the artist's (Ketty La Rocca) son. He is the owner of all property right of Ketty La Rocca and he agrees with this use. ==

I don't know how solve the problem. I received the photo from the artist's (Ketty La Rocca) son. He is the owner of all property right of Ketty La Rocca and he agrees with this use. Can you help me. Wikipedia does not show the page that I created.
Thank in advance <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ugomatrix|Ugomatrix]] ([[User talk:Ugomatrix|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ugomatrix|contribs]]) 15:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Please read [[Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials]]. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 16:34, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

::The second part of your question would do better at [[WP:HD]], the help desk. Your page does show up here [[User:Ugomatrix/Ketty La Rocca]]. You created it in your userspace (sometimes called "in a sandbox"), because pages in the userspace can be used to work up rough drafts, and are not "live". You'd need to move your article from there to [[Ketty La Rocca]] before it would be considered "live". I can try to help you further if you want to contact me on my user talk page, or (since I am not online that often), other users would be glad to help you out at the help desk ([[WP:HD]]). As to the first part of your question, we need to have the copyright holder's permission on file, via e-mail. The link provided above about [[Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials]] gives more details on that. Also, you can always find pages and contributions you have made in the past by looking at your [[Special:Contributions/Ugomatrix|contribs]] (the link is at the top of every page, on the right hand side when you are logged in). Hope this helps some. -[[User:Andrew c|Andrew&nbsp;c]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Andrew c|<sup>[talk]</sup>]] 20:17, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

== The Counciller by Thomas Rowlandson ==

I am interested in uploading a low resolution copy of ''[http://lwlimages.library.yale.edu/walpoleweb/oneitem.asp?imageId=lwlpr10082 The Counciller]''{{sic}} by [[Thomas Rowlandson]] from the [[Lewis Walpole Library]] under {{TI|PD-old-100}} licence. By low-resolution I mean 515x768 pixels by 72dpi (although I would prefer a 400dpi version :(). Would someone confirm if this would be allowed please? --[[User:Senra|Senra]] ([[User Talk:Senra|Talk]]) 16:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Forgot to add ''The Counciller'' was first published on 1 January 1801 and the author died 1827. --[[User:Senra|Senra]] ([[User Talk:Senra|Talk]]) 16:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

:That seems fine to me. The Yale library's page has some text about asking permission, but I think that is just generic and does not apply to this image. [[User:Jc3s5h|Jc3s5h]] ([[User talk:Jc3s5h|talk]]) 17:15, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
:*Nor could it. The original is out of copyright. See the above [[#Replacing an image with a better version and copyright concern]], and the comment on the ''Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp'' case. --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 20:43, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

== Logo fair use question at FAC ==

There is a good faith difference of opinion at [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/School for Creative and Performing Arts/archive1]] regarding the use of [[:File:SCPA Logo.PNG]] in the infobox of [[School for Creative and Performing Arts]]. Other expert opinions would be helpful. --[[User:Nasty Housecat|Nasty Housecat]] ([[User talk:Nasty Housecat|talk]]) 03:28, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

== Copyright and images obtained from internet ==

1- I want to use this image (http://www.kyokushinkaikan.org/img/about/director/ph_director_01.jpg) for article [[Shokei Matsui]], does it comply with wikipedia policy and if so, what tags are required for it (ie fair use rationale)?
2- What are the policies for obtaining photos from facebook for use on wikipedia? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Bacturin|Bacturin]] ([[User talk:Bacturin|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Bacturin|contribs]]) 09:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
*Since Shokei Matsui is alive, we would need free imagery to depict him. That web site does not have a free license for its content. Rather, all rights are reserved. So, the answer is no. --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 14:28, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

== Here's an interesting question ==

Have a look at [[:File:Grainger Park.jpg]]. When the original file was uploaded the summary was ''This photograph was taken by Mrs. Frances Lipscomb in the late 1930's. At the time of posting it is the only known copy and was sold to me in 2005.'' Now the license is a {{tl|PD-self}} with the summary of ''I am the creator of this work. I hereby release it into the public domain for any and all purposes''. My first thought is that the photographer (Frances Lipscomb) may have passed away in 2005 and this image was purchased at an estate sale. My second thought is that the photographer, or one of their family members, was having a garage sale in 2005 and it was purchased. The third thought is the image was sitting in store (Antiques shop, sports memorabilia shop) and was purchased for them. At face value none of those would imply the actual copyright had passed onto the purchaser, even if was the only print - not if it was done in 2005 anyway. If the photographer did pass away in 2005 this would not be out of copyright and it would be owned by the heirs. One thing is for sure however, and that is the uploader is not the "creator of this work". Any suggestions for a correct tag and license? [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 14:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

== use image? ==

Is this image copyrighted? The label on it says "2005 Kay Chernush for the US State Department". Can I use it if it's owned by the state department?

:File:unknown-745757.jpg <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.146.29.219|68.146.29.219]] ([[User talk:68.146.29.219|talk]]) 17:43, 14 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::I can't find any image by this or similar name, so really cannot help you fully. US Federal government work is in the public domain though not all images found on their sites are official works. Sometimes they will attribute images to outside sources which is what the label you quote above seems to say but without an image link and a source we cannot confirm that. Yes you can use the image but only if it's proven to be owned by the state department. Good luck. [[User:Ww2censor|ww2censor]] ([[User talk:Ww2censor|talk]]) 13:02, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

== Creating a page for the SOA-manifesto ==

The SOA Manifesto (www.soa-manifesto.org) is a public domain site. I feel that it should exist in Wikipedia for notability reason. It seems like a logical complement to the SOA page.

I feel it is fair to ask if there could be a conflict of interest since I am one of the translators for the French and Spanish version. However, this is not a commercial product. So it does not sound like there is really a case for conflict of interest. There would be no reference to the individual translators.

The site would basically be a copy-paste of the manifesto, with a few links to other items in the original site. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Yveschaix|Yveschaix]] ([[User talk:Yveschaix|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Yveschaix|contribs]]) 03:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:This isn't a copyright issue, but [[Wikipedia:Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources|Wikipedia is not a mirror of public domain or other source material]]. If this content is notable, it may be appropriate for [[Wikisource]], but not for this project. If it is added to Wikisource, it can be linked from [[Service-oriented architecture]] if appropriate. Of course, it can be linked if appropriate ''already'', simply where it is. That's more a questiono for [[WP:ELN]], though. (I do have to point out, though, that you're mistaken about its being a "public domain" site. It is clearly copright reserved Copyright © 2009, The SOA Manifesto Authors , but it is licensed under CC-By-SA so it ''is'' compatible.) --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 11:50, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

== japonese language ==

Please tell me how to write in Japanese language (cantonnais): patience, persevere, endurance <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/99.199.195.193|99.199.195.193]] ([[User talk:99.199.195.193|talk]]) 03:51, 15 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

* This is the wrong venue for asking this question. You may want someone at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan]] to see if they could help. [[User:Soundvisions1|Soundvisions1]] ([[User talk:Soundvisions1|talk]]) 10:50, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

:The [[WP:RD/L|Language reference desk]] also has several regulars who would be able to answer this question. <code>[[User:Decltype|decltype]]</code> <small>([[User talk:Decltype|talk]])</small> 10:54, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

== Library of Congress Overseas work ==

This question is about text rather than images, but I couldn't find the right place to ask, and assumed text is covered under "media". There are a bunch of profiles of authors, such as [http://www.loc.gov/acq/ovop/delhi/salrp/dwivedi.html this one] ([http://www.loc.gov/acq/ovop/delhi/salrp/all-countries.html full list]), that have been written by the [http://www.loc.gov/acq/ovop/delhi/salrp/about.html "New Delhi office of the Library of Congress"]. Is this text public-domain, on account of having been produced by the Library of Congress? (They have a [http://www.loc.gov/acq/ovop/delhi/salrp/copyright.html page about Copyright and Permissions], but that deals with the audio recordings, not the brief texts about the authors.) [[User:Shreevatsa|Shreevatsa]] ([[User talk:Shreevatsa|talk]]) 12:39, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:04, 15 September 2010

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions&oldid=384983144"