Wikipedia:Media copyright questions

• About Wikipedia (Welcome)
• Contributing
• FAQ
• Help menu (Directory)

• Asking questions (Help desk
• Reference desk)
• Glossary (Abbreviations)
• Wikicode help (Tools)

Click here to ask your question

(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)

How to add a copyright tag to an existing image

1. On the description page of the image (the one whose name starts File:), click Edit this page.
2. From the page Wikipedia:Image 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 the GFDL, an acceptable Creative Commons license, or has released their image into the public domain, this permission must be documented. Please see Requesting copyright permission for more information.
3. Type the name of the tag (e.g.; {{GFDL-self}}), not forgetting {{ before and }} after, in the edit box on the image's description page.
4. Remove any existing tag complaining that the image has no tag (for example, {{untagged}})
5. Hit Save page.
6. If you still have questions, go on to "How to ask a question" below.

How to ask a question

1. To ask a new question hit the "Click here to ask your question" link above.
2. Please sign your question by typing ~~~~ at the end.
3. Check this page for updates, or request to be notified on your talk page.
4. 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.

Modifying Relations Locators

I take the maps from the bilateral relations pages and make new ones for the pages without them. What do I select for the copyright status? These maps are owned by Wikipedia, it looks like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChizzleDonkey (talk • contribs) 01:52, 8 January 2016‎

All the image you duplicate have a copyright licence and you should use the same licence for you modified images unless the modifications are so significant that a new licence would be acquired. There are numerous locator and country maps on the commons and simple additions and removal of text or shapes, or adding colours to countries would not confer any new copyright on you. Just use the same licence as the original. ww2censor (talk) 10:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Special images of dead persons

As far as I understand, current Fair use policy precludes use of a (possibly) copirighted photograph of a dead person if there are public domain images of that person. But what if these free images may be considered to poorly represent the appearance of the person in question that potentially can lead to misinformation of a reader? May it be a case for the Fair use? Эйхер (talk) 11:47, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Question here

Regarding if quotes required for PD content. IMO the answer is no. Wondering others thoughts? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Regarding license tag for image on wikipage "Lavdrim Muhaxheri" (english version)

Hi, I've added an image Lavdrim_wiki.jpeg to the Wiki - page Lavdrim Muhaxheri with the upload - wizard. I added the image on 12 December 2015, then someone removed it on 16 December with motivation "No license since 16 December 2015". I undid this removal since there was no information about that the image would be/ or should be removed by 16 December 2015 on the wizard -page. I added the image through the upload - wizard again on 3 January 2016 with the upload - wizard and added the license tag "PD-ineligible". It would be appreciated if someone could check that/if I've added the correct license tag. Regards, KewinRozzKewinRozz (talk) 19:25, 10 January 2016 (UTC).

Greetings, added a link to the page. Unfortunately, photographs are not PD-ineligible because courts have found that there is a degree of originality/creativity inherent to photography. Thus, you need a photography which is licensed - a copyright license - that satisfies the requirements on this page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:30, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

I've removed the tag for the article. It is inappropriate in articles is only used for file pages but this one clearly does not qualify as Jo-Jo Eumerus says. Anyway the image c:File:Lavdrim wiki.jpeg has already been tagged for deletion on the commons where it is hosted. ww2censor (talk) 19:38, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

I've found the license - tag to use for the video wherefrom the image/screenshots was but then it says on the Commons tag - page that screenshots will be removed. Is there a license-tag for screenshots from license - tagged videos? KewinRozz 19:46, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

The image was deleted twice on the commons because you never provided a proper licence for it. You should really address the issue there by making contact with one of the deleting admins and point them to the webpage where the licence shows that the image is freely licenced and they will likely undelete the image adding the licence. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 20:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I'll ask the question to the admin on Commons, thanks. KewinRozz 19:46, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

image copyright

How to prove the own copyrighted material in wiki```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukog (talk • contribs) 11:42, 11 January 2016

Is there an actual question? Perhaps you need to read WP:COPYRIGHT. ww2censor (talk) 19:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Old wine and new bottles

1) It was common in the United States, for many years, for public domain books to be reissued in paperback editions, without any copyright notices. If the book (published before 1978) carried a new cover, and no distinct copyright notice for the cover, is it safe to conclude that the cover is public domain?

2) During the same time period, pre-1978, it was also common for paperback releases of older books to carry new cover artwork. If the book carries only the copyright for the original publication (and let's say this is, arbitrarily, at least seven years prior to the paperback appears), has the cover been published without an appropriate copyright notice, and therefore fallen into public domain?

3) In either of the above cases. does it matter if the artist is credited without any pertinent copyright notice?

I understand that "public domain" here refers only to US law, and that it's necessary to examine each book individually to assure, for example, that the copyright notice isn't in small type on the back cover. One thing I have noticed is that it wasn't unusual, when the book included a new introduction or notes, for there to be a separate, accurately dated, copyright notice for those texts. I therefore infer that the omission of a cover copyright notice was not inadvertent. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 20:42, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Re 1. Yes I think it is safe if as you said there are no copyright notices anywhere in the book.

2. Even though the copyright is for a previous publishing edition with a different cover, I don't think it would be safe to assume that the cover may not be considered as copyrighted. But I have no authority on that opinion so it would be interesting to find out.

3. I don't think the artist needs to be specifically referenced in the copyright notice.

What did you mean by "I therefore infer that the omission of a cover copyright notice was not inadvertent". That the publisher knew that the cover would not be considered as copyrighted? The implicit inference in the syllogism went over my head :)

The authority on these question is Clindberg at wikimedia commons. Contact him on his talk page at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Clindberg Rybkovich (talk) 02:33, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

advertisement photo of jazz club on cover of magazine from 1964

How can I use an advertisement photo of a building front of a jazz nightclub printed on the cover of a magazine which has been out of business for 45 years? What Wikipedia copyright tags would I use to classify this photo?

The magazine is from 1964. The two owners were shown as insets in the photo but I want to digitally removed them to show only the building facade. There is no indication of a copyright mark or author on or near the photo in the ad. The two owners of the nightclub are deceased and the nightclub closed in 1972. I also searched the U.S. Copyright record books for 1964 photos of the band's name and the owners names and found no listing indicating a copyright. Thank you.

Prior to 1978, an advertisement in a magazine is not part of the magazine's copyright. So if there is no copyright on the advertisement then it is in the public domain. It is an advertisement because it is on the back cover? If it is an advertisement, it is in the public domain so you can alter it and then it becomes your own work. The easiest way to upload it would be through Wikimedia Commons it would take you step by step through the process, asking you where you got the original image and how you want your image to be licensed. It will add the tags automatically. I am not sure how to do it through wikipedia itself. Rybkovich (talk) 01:55, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

PS commons may not ask you where you got the original image so add that info in the comment section and if the original picture is online include a link to original image. Rybkovich (talk) 01:59, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

The correct copyright tag to use for such images is: {{PD-US-no notice}} which is also available on the commons. ww2censor (talk) 11:44, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Would like someone to look into this.

I have a dispute over a supposed copyright claim. File:Camp_Joe_Holt.jpg See my Talk section for details and comments. It's a bit complicated so I'll accept whatever decision is made. JeffersonClark (talk) 15:50, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

@JeffersonClark: When an account name ends in "bot", it's an automated program that performs certain tasks; in this case to tag images missing required information. So there's no one to dispute there, it's just a robot. If the actual author of the image is truly lost to history, you could possibly cite that as "Author unknown", but you'd still need to find out and cite where it was published. If you can indeed substantiate that it was published in the 1860s, that should be enough to support a claim of being public domain due to age. But for verification purposes, that information does need to be on the image description page. You've still got a week to add it before the file will be deleted. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:58, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I realize that it was an auto function. My problem is that there are at least two independent sources (not including the copy that I have). They are two different scans of the same subject but not the same original photograph. Neither gives an actual source or date.

http://cdm16066.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p16066coll24/id/1504

Copyright: The Jeffersonville Township Public Library provides access to these materials for educational and research purposes and makes no warranty

with regard to their use for other purposes. The written permission of the copyright owners and/or holders of other rights such as publicity and/or privacy

rights is required for distribution, reproduction, and other use of protected items beyond that allowed by fair use or other statutory exemptions.

Responsibility for making an independent legal assessment of an item and securing any necessary permissions ultimately rests with persons desiring to use the item.

& (here's the problem) http://images.indianahistory.org/cdm/ref/collection/dc008/id/634

Owning Institution: Indiana Historical Society

Date Circa 1866

Copyright Notice Digital Image © 2009 Indiana Historical Society. All Rights Reserved.

I don't know where I acquired the copy that I have. It's been in my files for at least 15 years. I've done image searches but can only find the two listed above. JeffersonClark (talk) 17:49, 15 January 2016 (UTC)