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)

Copyright Question photo's ATLANTA BOY BAND

Friday 19th October 2007

I can't understand why the copyright of the two photo's used on the page for ATLANTA BOY BAND are being called into question when they were first uploaded, I confirmed they where my own personal copyright and I completed all the necessary details required.

They where used on the page ATLANTA LIVERPOOL BOY BAND then, but for some reason that page would not show in searches or if people entered the web address that is why the page ATLANTA BOY BAND was opened.

Now two most serious "Libelous" points have been raised to delete the ATLANTA BOY BAND, this I take as a personal slur on my good character that I am not telling the truth. I worked for a Radio Station for 21 years here in the UK and I am not willing to accept serious accusations like this. If the page is deleted by Wikipedia it associates the site also with these libel statements that have been made.

Atlanta Liverpool Boy Band 11:55, 19 October 2007 (UTC) JBS

We have still had no response to this point about the copyright of the two pictures used on the Atlanta Boy Band page, we clearly stated and filled in the relevant pages to state these are Our Own Copyright. Our page has been deleted even though we produced evidence requested, we are current in appeal asking for the page entry to be fully restored, so we would like to clear this photos problems up as well. Thanks Atlanta Liverpool Boy Band 10:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atlanta Liverpool Boy Band (talk • contribs)

Pictures of Florida Tech Buildings

I'm trying to improve the Florida Institute of Technology article and take some pictures of some of the major buildings on campus. If I take the picture myself, may I upload it to Wikipedia so long as I sign it with a CC 3.0? Or do I need to have a Fair-Use Rationale stating that the building is part of private property...etc.? Thanks. Jameson L. Tai 20:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you can release pictures of buildings under a free license. Buildings are copyrighted in the sense that you can't construct an identical one, but you can generally still take pictures. 17Drew 21:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The "generally" here has mainly do do with public art that may be displayed either in, around, or as part of a building. Something like a mural is copyrighted apart from the building, and if it is visible the photo cannot be freely licensed. TCC (talk) (contribs) 05:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there's all sorts of weirdness when it comes to that. And then apparently it's also possible to trademark a building. Who'd've thought? But cases like these most likely won't apply for the Florida Tech pictures. 17Drew 06:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Image problems

Since sourcing is very relative to copyright status verification, I directed here. I recently tagged this image as no-source but when I viewed this again, the tag was removed and the sourcing says, The cover art can or could be obtained from the record label. Is that how wikipedians cite source? Watch out. --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 03:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Covers to singles, albums, books, etc. are referenced to the singles, albums, books themselves. 17Drew 04:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Really? They don't need source from a certain concrete site? --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 09:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

It's always possible to scan an album cover. It doesn't need to come from a website. In that sense there's really only one possible source for an album cover image. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it does. However, the way he/she put his/her source, the way it was written is not good and is not acceptable, i think. --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 10:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Far more importantly, it had no fair use rationale. But "this is the cover art" is perfectly acceptable for source information. The source is necessarily the cover of the album. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:38, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok. --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 01:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

adding the appropriate image tag to a photo appearing on the "Taekwondo Hall of Fame" page

There is a photo which was taken and uploaded by me with the assistance of a senior member of the Taekwondo Hall of Fame which appears on the "Taekwondo Hall of Fame" wikipedia page. What is the appropriate image tag and how do I add it

see Taekwondo Hall of Fame —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.193.86.250 (talk) 11:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that's a logo. You can use the {{non-free logo}} template for proper licensing. For further infos, you can get assistance here. --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 12:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

No, he's asking about Image:Grup.jpg.

If you took the picture yourself, you need to license it with one of the free licenses whose tags are listed here. To tag it, navigate to the image page, and click on the edit link. This will edit the text around the image, not the image itself. Add the tag (including the double curly braces) for the license you select. Be sure to add a note explaining you made the photo yourself. At that point feel free to remove the {{untagged}} tag.

If you did not take the picture yourself, the person who did needs to send an email to "permissions-en at wikimedia dot org" giving the name of the image and saying specifically which free license he's granting for it. See WP:COPYREQ for an example of what the email should look like. If he is not willing to grant one of those free licenses, then we cannot have the image at Wikipedia. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, i thought it's the logo. --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 02:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Airport terminals of next decade

I have been asked to do a project on "Airport terminals of next decade". Can anybody help me in doing this project. This project shall contain at least 50 pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.90.123.190 (talk) 11:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

You want the reference desk for questions like this. But bear in mind that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and we tend not to accumulate many articles on speculative topics. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

DnD image

I don't know how to classify a picture of a Dungeons and Dragons character.

Kingdomkey01 21:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

What is it a picture of, where did it come from, and who made it? TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

stoessner bucha estate photo

Dear Sirs - My family took the photo of our ancestral estate! ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoessner-stines (talk • contribs) 02:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Southern Leyte Subang Daku River.png

I recently uploaded this image but it seems that there are no proper licensing for this. Bot currently tag this image. For further info, please try to visit the image and view its summary. Thanks. --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 03:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Could this be saved if i upload this to wikimedia commons? --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 03:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Why do you think it's public domain? I don't see any release. It appears to be protected by copyright, so it definitely can't be used at Commons. It can't be used here either, as non-free images of landscapes are almost always replaceable. Sorry! -- But|seriously|folks  04:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

What tag is applicable? I'm nor familiar with this. BritandBeyonce 05:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

No tag is applicable. We do not host replaceable fair use images. TCC (talk) (contribs) 06:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Kindly remove the image. --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 06:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Question about my downloading of the Image:JemtalentsearchVHS.JPG file for the Jem (TV series) listing

Hello,

I just provided the Image:JemtalentsearchVHS.JPG to Wikipedia. I scanned this cover from my copy of the videotape from my personal home video collection. Is there a way I can keep the image to stay on Wikipedia, since it is my image from scanning my video tape? I just don't know anything about the copyright status/legal issues that Wikipedia complains about regarding images downloaded to Wikipedia, and I just thought it would be nice to provide an illustration regarding the section about Jem video tapes in the listing for Jem (TV series) on Wikipedia.

Thank you.

Bill

Hi, I removed the image in this page because they are not supposed to appear other than the article they are uploaded for; they are limited in use depending on the purpose. On your case, even though you scanned it by yourself, still, its protected by copyright. You may visit this page and choose what fits for the image. In addition, please supply the needed fair use rationale. Thank you. --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 10:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Question: Own map diagram but map is taken from Google Earth

Hello,

I want to put an explosion map for the 2007 Glorietta explosion Wikipedia page, and I don't know what license it applies. I made the diagram of the explosion itself from Photoshop, and the Google Earth capture of the map is behind it. I showed the location of the places, and the explosion site itself. Chitetskoy 13:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Google Earth maps are copyrighted. You'll have to redraw the map yourself for this image to be acceptable. Copyrighted maps are practically never allowable under the non-free media policy because they're replaceable. Any sufficiently skilled Wikipedia editor can create a free map showing the same information. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Skew Bridge

Hi again all, I have uploaded the image Skew_bridge.jpg and I got a bot warning me about it. I'm pretty sure that the image is free as it is very old and is posted on many webpages. What license should I use? Thanks DoyleyTalk 16:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

How old particularly? Remember that copyright protection takes a long period before it expires. In that case, though its being used by other sites, who knows if they have the permission? --BritandBeyonce ^{(talk•contribs)} 01:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Theme park map classification?

I picked up a map of Epcot and uploaded it after scanning it (File:Epcot Map August 06.jpg) and it got deleted. Why did it get deleted, and how should I classify Theme park maps in the future? Cheers from Malpass93 18:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

You were warned about a problem with this image more than 2 weeks ago. In the future you might be able to prevent problems like this by not ignoring the warnings when you receive them.

Be aware that image names are case sensitive; the file you uploaded is Image:Epcot Map August 06.JPG. If you look at that location, you'll find the entry from the deletion log explaining that the image had no image copyright tag, which is exactly how the problem was described to you on your user talk page.

If the image is appropriate for Wikipedia, since it's copyrighted by someone else it could only be used under the nonfree media policy. This almost never permits copyrighted maps to be uploaded since any sufficiently skilled Wikipedia editor could create a free version showing the same information. To justify using work owned by someone else, you'd have to show that it conveys information it is not otherwise possible to present, but that's very doubtful. If we could use it, you'd have to tag it {{non-free fair use in|articlename}} and provide a specific rationale justifying its use according to the policy. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Meta Knight Image license

I need an image for the Meta Knight page. I want to upload this one from Kirby Air Ride but I don't know if it came from a screen shot, a promotional packet or what. Could someone identify the origin of this image? --Is this fact...? 19:56, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

It's copyrighted of course, so it could only be used as non-free media. The ultimate source appears to be here; if it was available at either the Nintendo or Kirby sites it isn't now. Tag it {{non-free character}} and be sure to add a fair use rationale. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for image: Soraida Martinez.jpg

Hello, Some time ago I uploaded a jpeg image of a photo of the artist, Soraida Martinez. The image was deleted because I did not indicate the source and copyright status. My questions are as follows: 1. this image was from the artist's own website and she gave me direct permission to use this image on wikipedia. 2. the artist is the direct copyright holder of this image, as well as images of her artwork; therefore, which tag do I use in this instance. In other words, I want to upload this image again, as well as a gallery of the artist's artwork, but I want to make sure that the copyrights to her photo and images of her artwork are legally protected. The artist has agreed to allow her own image and images of her artwork to be used for non-profit and educational purposes, but not for commercial purposes. I have read your copyright information, but I am still not certain which tag would apply for copyrighted two dimensional paintings; please advise, before I upload these images.

Thank you.

Victor

P.S., I also see that this article has been labeled a stub...I have alot more information to submit, including magazine/newspaper articles and internet interviews...can you advise on the best way to proceed. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VictorEdgar (talk • contribs) 04:40, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

That image is absolutely non-free since someone owned that. However, because of her permission to you, you feel that its already unbounded by copyright protection. Please note that its still "publicly" copyrighted, in the sense that you have had conversation privately. For you to upload that again, please tell the copyright holder to send her permission to this address "permissions-en at wikimedia dot org (permission-en@wikipedia.org)". If she will send a message stating for a public release, the image will then be a public domain, if not, the image is still copyrighted and there is a corresponding tag for non-free image. You can choose from this list. Thank you. --BandB ^{(talk•contribs)} 04:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

To clarify the above, permission for use on Wikipedia is insufficient. The copyright owner must be willing to allow commercial, non-educational use and derivative works. The release most certainly does not have to be to the public domain, but it does need to be one of these free licenses.

Also contrary to the above, we cannot use a non-free image of a living person. In most cases this is replaceable fair use, since it's generally possible to take a picture of a living person, and is therefore disallowed by the very first category of the non-free media policy.

Actually, the artist may or may not be the copyright holder of the image, depending on her agreement with the photographer. Generally speaking, without a specific agreement to the contrary, the photographer will own the copyright. So she may or may not be able to legally release it under a free license even if she can otherwise use it for publicity purposes such as on her website.

The stub template simply describes the current state of the article and marks it as a work in progress, so that no one will be tempted to nominate it for deletion prematurely. Simply proceed with article development as you have currently planned. When it gets long enough -- how long is "long enough" is something of a judgment call -- feel free to remove the template yourself. TCC (talk) (contribs) 06:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Victor for such uncleared statement. I hope TCC made this clear. BandB ^{(talk•contribs)} 06:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

clarification

I asked permission from the National Archive of Australia (a government body) to use two images displayed on their website which are part of their collection. I used the request for permission template I found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Boilerplate_request_for_permission and received this reply:

"Thank-you for your copyright request and use of the images on the Wikipedia’s webs site. The National Archives of Australia gives you permission to use the following items on the web site: A6180, 17/9/75/15 A6180, 1/12/71/22

There is no copyright charge for the use of the material whether commercially used or not and can be placed on the website. The copyright is still retained by the National Archives of Australia. We would appreciate the acknowledgement of the National Archives as the source of the image as the example shown below: National Archives of Australia: A6180, 17/9/75/15

Yours sincerely, Gregory F Cope Copyright Officer National Archives of Australia"

My question is, is this sufficient to use the two images on wikipedia, or is there a further process I have to follow? Phanto282 05:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

With that permission, we can still only use the images as non-free media. Permission for Wikipedia only, which is what this appears to be, is not sufficient. While they allow commercial use, it's not clear that they allow derivative works or will allow free distribution from Wikipedia to other users. We need a free license. For some help in requesting a release under a free license, see WP:COPYREQ, which also contains instructions on what to do once acceptable permission is received.

If, on requesting clarification, you are told that derivative works are acceptable and that the image may be freely shared, {{attribution}} would be the appropriate tag. TCC (talk) (contribs) 06:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Just want to know

What is the temp. in outterspace and is there a difference in deep space?

Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexshazen (talk • contribs) 09:06, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

If you want my opinion, cold is cold. But you should probably ask at the reference desk. This page is for copyright issues. -- But|seriously|folks  04:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

United Nations Resolutions

What copyright applies to UN Security Council documents? Socrates2008 13:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Most UN documents are PD - see {{PD-UN}}. --Davepape 20:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Can I upload this image?

Image is Image:UJATlogo.jpg. This is an image of the Coat of Arms (Logo) of the Universidad Juarez Autonoma de Tabasco, Villahermosa, Tabasco, Mexico. The image can be appreciated at the University's own website "www.ujat.mx" [Home > Conocenos > Escudo Universitario]. The image appears to have been intended for existence in the public domain. I could find no reference at all that the image is copyrighted. The website itself www.ujat.mx is not copyrighted either - at least I could not find any reference/copyright mark/claim that the site and/or the image where copyrighted. I believe the Coat-of-Arms logo was intended for the public domain. Fair use appeat to apply here. Is it OK to upload this image?

Robruiz 19:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The image is, of course, already uploaded so your question is really moot. The real question is what you should do to ensure it stays.

You're confusing several different ideas. The first is that fair use has something to do with public domain. Actually, if we must invoke the fair use doctrine to use an image, that's because the image is copyrighted and not in the public domain. Fair use allows limited use of copyrighted material under certain circumstances.

Another issue here is that you assume that just because an image is publicly available it's "intended for existence in the public domain". Public domain is a legal status of a work where either the copyright has expired or it's ineligible for copyright. An author releasing all rights isn't technically the same thing, but it amounts to the same degree of free use.

Under Mexican law there is no registration requirement for an author to secure his rights to a work. Whether marked or not, whether publicly available on a website or not, copyright exists on all works. We cannot just take it for free use without an explicit license from the copyright owner. This will not "appear" to be anything; it will be stated outright.

Since this logo was created by a university employee in the course of his duties, the university is its author as far as copyright is concerned. They own it. That means that if we can use it at all, we can only do so under a theory of fair use under Wikipedia's non-free media policy and guidelines.

As it happens, {{non-free logo}} is already a fair use tag. You only lack a rationale. Logos broadly all have the same rationale, so there's a second template you need to add to the page: {{logo fur}}. You must fill in at least the name of the article in which the logo is being used and the "use" field with one of the listed permissible values.

You should also follow the advice that's been added and scale the image down. There is no reason for fair use images to be any larger than the display size in the article. You can do this by re-downloading it in Wikipedia and using the scale feature in any image editing software. Paint.NET is free and reasonably full-featured if you don't have anything more sophisticated than the Paint that comes with Windows. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Please help

Please go to Image:Dejen misura da cima W.jpg. Although the author seems to be happy with the PD tag, he also appears to be stating that he would prefer to always be credited. Can you suggest the most appropriate copyright tag? Thanks! Viewfinder 20:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Note how we make the image into a link: add a colon at the beginning.

The appropriate tag here appears to be {{attribution}}. If the author always wants to be credited and is making that a condition of the image's use, then it's not PD. I note the permission granted is actually more expansive than the uploader has stated. He says "he agrees to the use of the image by Wikipedia," which is ordinarily a license we can't use and would result in the image's speedy deletion. The quoted email actually says "pubblicazione libera", which is much more what we need.

The uploader needs to forward the email containing the permission to "permissions-en at wikimedia dot org". TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Invalid fair use?

Hi, all, I hope someone can help me with my problem.

Apparently the image that I have uploaded, Image:Rf cd cover.jpg , has an invalid fair use. However, I'm not quite sure what makes it "invalid." I thought I included a valid enough fair use rationale, but obviously a bot disagrees. I was hoping that someone could take a look at it and tell me what is wrong with it so that I can fix it, and fix the ones that I upload in the future.

Thanks, Happyface162 22:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:NFCC#10c says that The name of each article in which fair use is claimed for the item, and a separate fair-use rationale for each use of the item, as explained at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline. The rationale is presented in clear, plain language, and is relevant to each use. With this edit, the rationale was being claimed for Rascal Flatts where in fact, the image is being used for the article Rascal Flatts (album). Bot changed it already. No worries. --BandB ^{(talk•contribs)} 01:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Ina what I presume is a similar case, I have been informed that the fair use rationale of Image:WakeInFrightAd1.jpg is invalid (and will therefore be removed in a few days. However, the rationale I used is non-free poster, which is used by a number of other poster images, none of which appear to have been marked for deletion. What is missing from the Wake In Fright image to make it a candidate for deletion? --Roisterer 04:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Please link to images as instructed at the top of this page; don't insert them.

{{non-free poster}} is the tag. The fair use rationale is something else you have to add. The purpose is to explain how the use of the image in the particular article where it's included (and the article must be linked to) conforms to the non-free media policy. TCC (talk) (contribs) 04:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Can I get an example of what to write as a rationale?

I have two images tagged for deletion. They are CD album covers. Can someone please give me an example of what I should include in my rationale? HOw should I word it, what should it include? I've referred to the guidelines but I would like a clear example, rather than just an instruction. --BrianFG 03:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Since it's a non-free image, protected by copyright, they must be well supplied with the required rationale. To further illustrate that, see Fair_use_rationale. By doing so, the given statement must pass the criteria for non-free image, see WP:NFCC. In addition, we have a list of tags that will yield a result of rationale. For albums, see this or to this . If you dont want a template, you can write it in this way, for instance. However, you must bear in mind that the rationale supplied is applicable and fits to the situation. --BandB ^{(talk•contribs)} 04:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I've come up with something as the template is confusing and doesn't seem to work properly. I hope I have covered everything; if not, I'll just stop uploading album covers.--BrianFG 04:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The template works properly. You need to prefix the template call with "subst:" as the documentation explains. But by all means, once you fix the templates don't forget to remove the {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} tag, otherwise it'll get automatically deleted anyway. TCC (talk) (contribs) 04:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

By the way, a better template to use for the rationale is {{album cover fur}}. It does seem to be broken at the moment, but I'm working on it. In the meantime just use it, and it'll probably look OK tomorrow. TCC (talk) (contribs) 04:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

NM. My bad. razzafrazzin non-standard names. See Image:Disembowelment-transendence.jpg for an example. TCC (talk) (contribs) 04:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Just let him use the other so that he could remove the tag anytime. --BandB ^{(talk•contribs)} 04:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that's better. --BandB ^{(talk•contribs)} 04:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Motorcycles%40Indy.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Motorcycles%40Indy.jpg needs to be reviewed by Flicker Reviewer bot, or somebody needs to check this image's free use capacities. Description says CC-BY-NC-ND -- which woudl make it incompatible. Guroadrunner 08:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, no I checked it (the url is in the description -- stupid me). So I have put prod and ifd on it. Guroadrunner 08:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

copy the logo of Nokia Corporation

Hello! I want to know if it is possible to copy the logo of Nokia Corporation. I need it because in my coursework for Economics I decided to choose Nokia as a company to research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Band88 (talk • contribs) 15:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

That logo is hosted here under the fair use doctrine. As long as you adhere to those legal requirements yourself -- and as you are using it for educational purposes that goes a long way toward qualifying it -- then you can use it. TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Highland Voice image

Sorry I uploaded it three times. The one I would like to keep for the article Highland Voice is Highland Voice masthead.jpg.

The Highland Voice was a student paper. It folded 18 years ago. The paper was located on the Highland Lakes campus of Oakland Community College, Waterford, MI. The campus remains.

There is no copyright. The masthead has been used by another publication at least once (March or April 1987 by another student newspaper, the Orchard Ridge Recorder). It was designed for the paper by a student working for the paper.

I don't know what more you need.

Can I keep it?

Troyvarsity 17:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

First, don't create a redirect just to link to an image. See the directions in bold type inside the box marked with the big orange exclamation point ball at the top of this page to find the right way to do that.

Unless a work is ineligible for copyright by law, there is no such thing as "there is no copyright" for anything made since 1989. This is a borderline case in a couple of ways.

First, it may well be ineligible for copyright, since details like variations in color and typography are normally not copyrightable; and the words themselves are not. In that case you could tag it {{PD-ineligible}}. But with the squares and other arrangements is just might rise to the level of creative work where copyright becomes possible, so it's safest to assume it's eligible and proceed otherwise.

The important point here isn't when the paper ceased publication, but when it started, and when this masthead came into use. I assume this was sometime after 1963, and we know it was after 1989. It is public domain if The masthead came into use before 1 March 1989, and was published without a copyright notice. A copyright notice anywhere on the paper qualifies, so if you find one in the issue then it's not public domain.

It would be copyrighted if it came into use after 1963 even if it was published without notice but was subsequently registered. But I just searched the copyright office database for registrations from 1978 on, and it wasn't in there. So if the masthead came into use after 1978, and there's no notice on the paper, we can safely assume it's PD.

If it was first used before 1 January 1978, tag it {{PD-Pre1978}}. If it was first used between 1 January 1987 and 1 March 1989, tag it {{PD-US}} and add a note that it was first published before 1 March 1989 without a copyright notice and was not subsequently registered. (We don't have a specific tag for that case.)

If the above conditions for the public domain do not hold, then it is under copyright and we can only use it as non-free media. In that case, you'd have to tag it {{non-free logo}}, and add {{logo fur}} to add a fair use rationale. TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

lockbow

I have a picture of a modern skane lockbow and I have e-mailed the contact on the website, who has e mailed back to give me permission to use it and I have forwrded it to wikimedia but I am still told that the image may be deleted. How do I copyright tag it to preserve it from deletion?

Streona 22:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

That depends on the permission that you received.

If it wasn't clearly a free license, we still have to treat it as non-free media. In that case, it's clearly replaceable since it's a photo of a modern object that is hardly unique. If you did receive a free license, you need to tag the image accordingly and remove the warning template. If a free license was granted one of these tags will apply.

In any event, it can take a while for the permission to work its way through the system, so don't worry about it yet. TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion contested for specimen currency images. Question of copyright status.

I am contesting the deletion of all specimen currency images set for deletion at Malaya and British Borneo dollar. All of the images were tagged for deletion for lack of Fair Use Rationale, but not all currencies need a F.U. Rationale.

I want to know if Malaya and British Borneo dollars are in the public domain. I err on the belief they are, hence the contesting. Guroadrunner 00:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

They're tagged as {{non-free currency}}, which pretty much marks them for deletion if they lack rationale. It is assumed, absent any statement to the contrary, that images so tagged are fair use.

Current copyright status has been very difficult to unravel. This requires a dedicated expert in UK copyright law, so take the following with a grain of salt.

This currency was issued by Board of Commissioners of Currency, Malaya and British Borneo, which as a matter of course owned the copyrights to them under UK law. Presumably the copyrights reverted to either the Crown or Parliament on the dissolution of the Commission, but I don't believe that shortens the term in either case. Copyright on these banknotes therefore expires 70 year after publication. For a banknote issued in 1953, the copyright will therefore expire 31 December, 2023.

So no, these are not in the public domain, and yes, you need a fair use rationale for all of them. Even if I'm wrong this is the safest course of action, and these are clearly examples of valid fair use. TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed response. If I have time to do so, I will try to add a fair use rationale for each. They aren't my uploads, but I'd rather not see them deleted because as you said they can be covered under fair use. Guroadrunner 08:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Update : I've put the following on each image. If this isn't good enough or solid, I would like help making a good Fair Use Rationale.

{{Non-free use rationale |Description=Denomination of money from Malaya and the UK Borneo |Source=printed currency |Article= Malaya and British Borneo dollar |Portion= |Low_resolution=yes, and specimen |Purpose=to illustrate this denomination of money |Replaceability=none |other_information= }}

Wikipedia's arbitary rules with regard to album art

I was informed by BetacommandBot that the album cover art depicted in Image:Sidescover.jpg "does not qualify under fair use" with the following tag: {{Non-free album cover}} I do not see how this is a valid statement, considering that very many album articles use the same rationale and tag for their usage in Wikipedia. Why not this one?

Rules not consistently applied discredit the very foundation of what Wikipedia stands for. Why should the rules apply to some articles but not to all?

Bart 02:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Had you read the tag placed by BetacommandBot? Fair use is something that must be claimed for every article in which the cover is being used, and although you wrote a fair use rationale, you did not specify in which article you were going to use the image. This may be seen as "overkill", but I think it is the minimum we can require for images that do not help Wikipedia in its freedom goal. -- ReyBrujo 02:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I escaped the template so that this page is not included in the image category. -- ReyBrujo 02:54, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ellroy My Dark Places cover.jpg

An image I uploaded, Image:Ellroy My Dark Places cover.jpg, has been tagged for deletion as having a disputed fair-use claim per WP:NFCC#10c. My fair use claim includes 1) the source of the image (though no copyright information, since none is specified in or on the book, other than for the text and for the author photo on the back of the book; so my assumption was that the source--i.e. the publisher--is also the copyright holder), 2) the correct non-free book-cover license, and 3) the article (My Dark Places (book)) for which fair use is claimed. In what way is my claim deficient? Other than the unspecified copyright info, the only questionable thing I saw was that I erroneously used the ambiguous title My Dark Places in my rationale. I have disambiguated this on the image page to the correct My Dark Places (book). --ShelfSkewed Talk 02:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Have a look here. You're missing a statement about the purpose of the image. You can just say it's for identification of the subject of the article. You need a short explanation of why the image is not replaceable with free content; you can just say that all covers for this book are protected by copyright. You're missing a statement of the portion used; in this case it's the front cover only. Finally, this isn't a very low-res image. There's no reason for a fair use image to be any larger than the size it's scaled to in the article, say 200px wide or so. You're better off scaling it down.

You also need to tag it {{non-free book cover}}. Once you take care of all this, feel free to remove the warning notice from the image page.

{{book cover fur}} would help you here, but apparently someone put it into template space before it was finished. These things should really be developed in sandboxes. {{book rationale}} only anticipates that a book cover will be ripped off a website, not that an uploader will scan it himself, so it won't work for you here. TCC (talk) (contribs) 06:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

If used in a different language on wikipedia.

I have uploaded Image:Alice N' Chainz.jpg, and I do not know what tag to use. I got the image from here which is another article of wikipedia in a different language. The fair use lisencing should already be there, shouldn't it. Skeeker _[Talk] 05:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the link. You meant to link to the Lithuanian Wikipedia but you got the Portuguese instead. Note how we link to Wikipedia articles in other languages; we don't have to use external link syntax.

At the source the tag is the equivalent of {{non-free promotional}}, but apparently the Lithuanian Wikipedia does not require a fair use rationale. We do, and in any event you need to tag this copy of it as well. (Different Wikipedias have different rules about these things. For an image hosted at the English Wikipedia, you have to follow English Wikipedia rules.)

Incidentally, the only reason you can use this photo is because one of the people in it is dead, and as a photo of the original group it is therefore not replaceable. Fair use images that can be replaced cannot be uploaded according to policy. TCC (talk) (contribs) 05:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Betacommandbot's message re logo on European Research Council

Betacommandbot complained on Talk:European Research Council that the image used in the article (depicting the logo of the organization) does not have a fair use rationale. However, Image:ERC logo.png does include a rationale specific to the article. Could anybody please tell me what is missing, or did the bot make a mistake? Cheers, Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that it was because the fair use rationale did not have the "Article" parameter with the name of the article. The code, for example, be:

{{Non-free media rationale

|Article=European Research Council

|Description= ...

|Source= ...

|Portion= ...

|Purpose= ...

|Resolution= ...

|Replaceability= ...

|other_information= ...

}}

which it is now, after this diff.  :) Hope this helps. --Iamunknown 12:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

It is because you did not include the name of the article the image is being used. If you can see in this history, the template says NEEDS ARTICLE NAME and WP:NFCC#10c states that each fair-use rationale must include a link to the specific article in which fair use of the image is claimed. Don't worry, its fixed. --βandβ ^{(talk•contribs)} 12:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your answers. It looks like I didn't notice that the page was updated because I confused the file history with the revision history for the page itself. How embarrassing. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

It's fine. --βandβ ^{(talk•contribs)} 06:44, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Ann & Eddie jpg

The photo was taken by me {{GFDL-self}}tag, and is fine to use on the Ann Forster page if there is one. Forster is a known publicist and writer within the PR & Media industry having spearheaded campaigns including the motion pictures Gandhi and The War Room as well as advocacy campaigns for the UN and numerous NGO's and corporations.

Updated Logos

While working on a project about Railroads in Chicago, I've used some of the images from Wikipedia articles on Railroads. I've made a few edits, and would like to upload these. The edits are:

Added Transparency to the BNSF Logo

Cleared up unwanted white on the CSX Logo

Cleared up unwanted white on the CSS&SB Logo

Converted EJE Logo to .png and added transparency

What licence would these fall under, and how would I reference to the original images on Wikipedia? Would I need to add anything to the old logos to say that I'd uploaded a newer version?

--Danny252 14:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

May i know the link of the image? --βandβ ^{(talk•contribs)} 06:45, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Original images on wikipedia are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:BNSF.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CSX_Herald.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Southshore_freight.gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:EJ%26E.jpg

I'm assuming they should go under logos, having trawled through all the copyright listings? I still don't know how I should go about notifying people that the old images have been replaced.

Danny252 13:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyright, but use permitted.

I would like to use some photographs in a Wikipedia article from a web-site which specifies that it is copyright, but which also states "Copyright Information - You can copy/print pages from this site and photos from this site as long as the information copied/printed is not used for commercial or monetary gain." Can I use the photographs, and if so, what is the appropriate tag? Tim Ross 18:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

What type of image is that? May I know the source? --βandβ ^{(talk•contribs)} 08:28, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

They are photos of various species of the landsnail Liguus. The source is <http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/Gold/9440/liguus/sitein.html>. Tim Ross 00:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

TV Commercial ScreenGrab

Following the addition of this tag {{di-disputed fair use rationale|concern=invalid rationale per [[WP:NFCC#10c]]|date=October 26 2007}} to the image Image:Corona Drink Flavours.jpg, I have updated fair use rational for the image- hope this is better? If not, how can I improve it (and future uploads) further? (I've read the instuctions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline) D666D 18:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

First and foremost, the image the time it was tagged has no Article name. WP:NFCC#10c states each fair-use rationale must include a link to the specific article in which fair use of the image is claimed. The image was retagged with {{di-replaceable fair use}} because Wikipedia do not host replaceable images. For non-free images, it doesn't pass the first criterion for non-free media. It's better to upload another image you own that serves the same information. Thank you. --βandβ ^{(talk•contribs)} 06:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Central Missouri Athletics Logo Squabble

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Central_missouri_logo.gif

I uploaded that logo from our university's athletics site, and now it is taken down with the message.............

This image or media has a fair use rationale that is disputed because of the following concern: invalid rationale per WP:NFCC#10c. Unless concern is addressed by adding an appropriate fair-use rationale, or in some other way, the image will be deleted or removed from some uses after Friday, 2 November 2007. Please remove this template if you have successfully addressed the concern. Note that, per WP:NFCC#10c, each fair-use rationale must include a link to the specific article in which fair use of the image is claimed. If you think the image should not be deleted, please discuss the matter with the editor who placed this template on the image. You can also place comments on the image talk page.

Administrators: check the image talk page for comments before deleting the image.

   Usage: {{di-disputed fair use rationale|date=26 October 2007|concern=invalid rationale per WP:NFCC#10c}}
   Notify the uploader with: ==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Central missouri logo.gif==

Thanks for uploading Image:Central missouri logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NeelyCrenshaw 02:08, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Add following to the image captions:

---

This file may be deleted at any time.

So, are we not allowed to have an image on our athletics page like every other university. This is our athletics mark, and now we are being told we cannot use it.

I need help ASAP on why this happened, and how it gets retified, because thi IS THE MARK WE USE!

NeelyCrenshaw 02:08, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

The image is under copyright protection so it must be fairly used. To do that, supply the page with rationale as to why the image is permitted to be used in Wikipedia. Also, indicate the name of the article it is being used for per WP:NFCC#10c which states that each fair-use rationale must include a link to the specific article in which fair use of the image is claimed. Thank you. --βandβ ^{(talk•contribs)} 06:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, it's fine to upload image as long it is supplied with required informations accordingly. --βandβ ^{(talk•contribs)} 06:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Jigsaw in Japan.jpg

Hi Wikipedia - Can you tell me in simple terms how to get a copyright tag attached to the image Jigsaw in Japan.jpg - My name is Des Dyer and I was the drummer and lead singer in the band and am also a director of Splash Records to which the copyright belongs. I would like to give permission for the a.m. image to be used on a GFDL level. Help me out here. I have already amended a quite a lot of the Jigsaw (band) page as some of the comments were inaccurate. I'm sure you would like your encyclopedia to be as accurate as possible so any contribution to this page from an actual member of the band and a director of the record company on which the band had its most successful hit, would surely be beneficial!! Cheers...........Des Dyer —Preceding unsigned comment added by Des Dyer (talk • contribs) 10:45, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Is the image your own work? --βandβ ^{(talk•contribs)} 10:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

The image was taken by my camera on my film - I didn't take the picture as I'm on stage playing drums. Subsequently this was used by Splash Records Ltd., with my permission. I am a director of the company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Des Dyer (talk • contribs) 11:08, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Though your the director of the company, it's still copyrighted and we have available tags for that. See this. --βandβ ^{(talk•contribs)} 08:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

That is not necessarily correct. If it was a photographer employed by your company, the photo may be a work for hire, depending on the contract. If it is a work for hire and you are the copyright owner, please send an email specifying this to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, following the instructions at WP:COPYREQ. Calliopejen1 00:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

That's better. --BandB ^{(talk•contribs)} 07:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Non-free fair use rationale template thinks DAZ Studio Article does not exist?

I am attempting top create a fair use rationale for Image:DAZ_Studio_1715_screenshot.png used in DAZ Studio using the Non-free fair use rationale template as it is a screenshot of copyrighted software. However this template thinks that the article DAZ Studio does not exist for some reason. --Aclapton 15:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Here is a link to the image: Image:DAZ_Studio_1715_screenshot.png --Aclapton 15:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Got template working at last. It should really recognise wikilinks. --Aclapton 15:51, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Troublesome

First I send my greeting to everybody who is going to answer this. I just joined Wikipedia in order to edit the page of my most favorite anime named Otogizoshi I've uploaded many pictures in order to make the page more informative. But as for the policy, I try to add all the details in need for the pictures.However, every week I just have time to online once and I always receive messages that tell me to add more details in pictures' pages, which I must say I'm bothered although I knew I must have done something incorrectly. Image:AbenoSeimei.jpg Image:SadamitsuUsui.jpg Image:Raikou.jpg Image:Cover1.jpg I'm not a natural English speaker.I use Non-free / fair use media which I think it is enough policy to be in a encyclopedia.Maybe I didn't add enough information for pages, but I can't understand what the administrator wants me to complete by only using Di-disputed fair use rationale ? I mean, I don't know which part is in need to complete. Please help me to complete it, and I will thank you thousands times.

M.H. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mansairaku (talk • contribs) 18:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree, the message is confusing even for native English speakers. It is telling you that you need to use the correct name of the article in the use rationale you wrote for the image. I see for Image:AbenoSeimei.jpg you used the template template:Non-free use rationale. In the "article" field you said "Article=Otogizōshi (anime)." But in fact, you used the image in Characters of Otogizōshi anime instead. So you just need to correct that. Edit the image page and change that line to "Article=Characters of Otogizōshi anime". Then delete the warning line that says {{di-disputed fair use rationale|concern=invalid rationale per [[WP:NFCC#10c]]|date=October 26 2007}}. That will fix the image. Wikidemo 21:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks thousands times for your help.I think I've got what to do now. Good day to you! M.H —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mansairaku (talk • contribs) 10:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

halloween?

good morning, was anting information, what is the correct calling for the holiday of halloween in romania|? i was told it was sanhaim but ths cant be as this word belongs to the kelts, so what would be the correct calling? they are part of russia or gremany correct so im sure its not sanhaim. helppp lol. thanks fantum —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.17.39 (talk) 19:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Good morning to you too. This particular place is not a good place to ask a question about Romanian holiday names. This is a discussion area for image and other media file use on Wikipedia. This could be a good place to practice your research skills. You might want to start with the Halloween article on Wikipedia and see if there is a link to a Romanian language article. You can also search around on google. There is probably a discussion of Haloween like traditions in various traditions. In some countries might find that there are two or more different holidays, first their own old holiday having to do with death, ancestors, or ghosts. Second, some countries have probably adopted the American holiday of halloween as a separate holiday from their own old holiday. It seems like holidays are one of America's biggest exports, along with junk food and television programs. You could also try sites like Yahoo answers, discussion boards about Romania, etc. I think there's a "reference desk" somewhere at Yelp where people research and answer questions for you. If you give up online, you can always go to a local library and ask the librarian. They love questions like that. Hope this helps. Wikidemo 21:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Press Kit photos

What is the copyright for press kit photos - these are dstributed for free use by the media and for promotion. I'm using a press kit photo from a local city on a page about that city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rickdrew (talk • contribs) 19:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

In most cases press kit photos are copyrighted, and released on licenses that are not sufficient for Wikipedia's needs. The licenses are enough that using them on Wikipedia pages is probably legal, but they aren't the broad "free" licenses that fit Wikipedia as a project. As a result those images have fot satisfy the non-free content criteria and associated guidelines at WP:NONFREE. The short answer is that the image is probably not usable on Wikipedia because there's almost certainly a free image out there that could be used instead. In a few cases the city press kit may contain an uncopyrighted image. The US government releases nearly all of its material into the public domain. Most cities don't but a few may. Or the city could have found an uncopyrighted picture to begin with. See if the press kit contains any copyright info, and if not you can ask the city press office what the copyright status is of its press kit photos. They ought to know. Wikidemo 21:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Would you please be so kind and remove

Image:TDB.jpg

When uploading, I confused with another file showing a portrait of Theodore de Bry (TDB)

Sorry for the inconvenience and my clumsiness.

Thanks in advance,

Luc.de.bry —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luc.de.bry (talk • contribs) 21:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Photo Invalid Rationale?

I feel I am being particularly stupid, but I just can not wrap my head about what I am being asked to do here - Image:BuffyAshley.jpg Can someone please explain, in small, easy steps, just what I did wrong, what I need to add and why? Please? Belle pullman 21:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow, the same question several times today. The bot must have been busy! You're being asked to not attend so many Andrew Lloyd Weber musicals. To get serious, you're being asked to add the name of the article somewhere in the use rationale. If you go to the image page you'll see that the use rationale template now says "Non-free / fair use media rationale - NEEDS ARTICLE NAME" because the article field is missing. Just edit the image page and add a line somewhere in the template section that says "Article=Ashley the Smoking Car." Also, make a copy of the template, verify that the rationale is truly the same (or change it if necessary) and use it for the other article, i.e. "Article=Buffy the Buffet Car". When you're done be sure to delete the warning tag (the line that starts "di-disputed fair use rationale"). Wikidemo 22:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou! Has this template been changed recently? I SWEAR there wasn't an article section when I put this up. Does it look right now? Thankyou for your help!Belle pullman 22:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it was added sometime around the beginning of October. So far about 14,000 of the 45,000 images now using the template have the article section filled out. The other 30,000 may have the article mentioned somewhere else. The requirement is old, but the field is a new way to encourage people to put the article name in a consistent, easy to find place so they don't get the same warning tag you got and so the image is not subject to deletion. Wikidemo 00:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Changed answer to replaceability question and reason

I uploaded Image:Bonniemacbird.jpg and received a notice that it will be removed next week unless the image is deemed to be irreplaceable. I have changed the answer from "yes" to "no" to the applicable question in the template. I also explained that I know of no other photographs of Bonnie MacBird in existence. Is changing the answer in the template sufficient? If not, is my explanation good enough? - Desmond Hobson 07:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a free content encyclopedia, which means all of our material is freely licensed. For a definition of freedom in this context see freedomdefined.org. Because of this we try and only use non-free content when we absolutely have to, or when there are no non-free alternatives which exist or could be created. In this case, since the subject is still alive, a free content image could be created of her. It's in the interest of increasing free content to encourage this creation while we still can. - cohesion 01:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

North Sea image

This image was published by the government of the UK [1] on this website [2] and the copyright info it linked to (crown copyright) said:

"You may re-use the material featured on this website (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium. You must re-use it accurately and not in a misleading context. You must acknowledge the material as Crown copyright and give the title of the document/publication." [3]

so i assume this is usable but i dont know how to label it, etc. i figured id ask here cause ive had stuff deleted before. thanks Jieagles 16:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

This is non-free content, and must adhere to all the non-free content criteria. The government of England does not publish works in the public domain, and puts substantial limitations on their re-use, as well as prohibiting modification. The correct tag is {{Non-free Crown copyright}}, and the image must have a non-free use rationale. - cohesion 01:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The key thing here is that a completely no-strings free replacement image could be created, based on the underlying ideas, rather than this particular expression of them. But if we accept this image, we make it less likely that anyone will create a completely free one. That's why it especially has to pass WP:NFCC #1. -- Jheald 03:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Naval images licensed to Italian wikipedia

The Italian Navy has granted permission for wikipedia to use it's images for non commecial use.

The license can be seen here in Italian: Permission

Since it seems impossible to link to the Italian server, how would one go about creating the licence (which i gather is compatible with the English language wikipedia) ?

The image in question can be found here Cavour image

--Sertmann 22:20, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't read Italian, but if the license is limited to non-commercial use it is non-free content. Wikipedia is a free content encyclopedia, which means all of our material is freely licensed. For a definition of freedom in this context see freedomdefined.org. The images may still be used but they would need to conform to our non-free content policy, and the non-free content criteria. If you have any other questions let us know. - cohesion 02:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Nobel Prize (R) Medal images

Image:DSCN0732.JPG

An administrator has suggested (in User talk:Shell Kinney#Images based on photographs of Nobel Prize (R) Medals) that I post this query here. The query questions the presentation of these images on their image pages and specifically the featuring of a "public domain" in the U.S. template tag being listed for ""Nobel medal dsc-6171.jpg" image and the "GFDL" license on the "DSCN0732.JPG" image. These templates/tags appear to be inconsistent with the uploaders' claims of "fair use" in "Nobel medal dsc06171.jpg" and with the notices of "proprietary rights" posted by the "author" of the designs of the medals, the Nobel Foundation. There still appears to be a need for detailed "fair-use rationales" for each of the separate uses of each one of these images (or any other images of these medals posted in Wikipedia), since they are "Derivative works (photographs) based on images for which the Nobel Foundation still claims to have "proprietary rights". The "public domain" and/or "GFDL" license template tags appear to conflict with registered trademark and copyright notices posted by the author of the image design, the Nobel Foundation. The Nobel Foundation's notices appear to pertain to images of all of its Nobel Prize (R) Medals. The copyright status of the images appears to be more complex than the "GFDL" license on the second image indicates or that the "public domain" in the U.S. tags indicate. Please see the discussions pertaining to these image pages, sources pertaining to the images listed in User talk:NYScholar#Information pertaining to registered trademarks and copyright pertaining to designs and images of the Nobel Prize Medals (and in Archive 16 linked there), in User talk:Shell Kinney#Images based on photographs of Nobel Prize (R) Medals (and prev. sec.), on the linked "non-free use" and "fair use" administrative pages, and the (locked) Wikipedia Foundation correspondence no. cited in the fair-use rationale for "Nobel medal dsc-6171.jpg" (which I am not able to verify myself). Thank you. --NYScholar 22:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

The image pages contain links to related discussion as well: e.g., in the first one listed: "Possibly unfree images 2007 October 21. --NYScholar 23:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

A lot of the history is here. -- But|seriously|folks  23:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Keke Wyatt

Is this and this OK? In other words, does that wording make it acceptable to use album covers in the above article here? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Album covers can be used in articles where there is critical commentary of the album, or its cover. For more information see the non-free content policy. - cohesion 02:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I guess I'm not explaning myself properly. I already explained that policy to the anon but they are claiming based on their edits to the image pages that it is now OK to use the images, here. What I need to know is if the use of that wording now makes it OK to use the images in that way. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

What's wrong with having scroll boxes on the page? CambridgeBayWeather claims that the article is hard to read; however, I find that it makes the article easier to read. Anytime you can decrease overall vertical scroll you increase page usability. And I changed the fair use rationale to justify/clear usage on the main artist article page were there is no copyright infringement or harm done as is on the individual album article page. 74.167.228.199 09:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Image with BLP/privacy issues?

Question about Image:Typical Support Order 0001.jpg. This image, which is a scan of a child support order, has a few identifying details blacked out, but on other parts of the document, the first and last names of the parties in the case are visible, as are the county and state. There's also an older version of the document that isn't blacked out at all. It doesn't appear that both parties have consented to have this on Wiki, and to the best of my knowledge, U.S. family court rulings are not public record. I'm wondering if it should be deleted as a possible privacy violation? Thanks, DanielEng 01:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Good catch. That shouldn't be here with any names visible. I've deleted it. Thanks!! -- But|seriously|folks  01:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Belinda Stronach

Found this pic Belinda_Stronach_Image_MainArticleImage-1-.jpg on this wed site http://www.torontodailynews.com/image_MainArticleImage.php?articleid=2006092401belinda-stronach And its on the Belinda Stronach page on wiki. What is the right copyright tag to put on this pic.Michaelm

The vast majority of images on the internet are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Unless you are aware that this image is somehow freely licensed it is probably not acceptable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a free content encyclopedia, which means all of our material is freely licensed. For a definition of freedom in this context see freedomdefined.org. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cohesion (talk • contribs) 02:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:HaydockPortrait.jpg

How do I add the source and creator? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skodoway (talk • contribs) 04:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The quickest way to add the source, creator, description and so forth, would be to simply add the following to the image description page (filling it out accordingly of course):

{{CommonsImageSummary|
|Description    =
|Source         =
|Date           =
|Author         =
|Permission     =
}}

-- Chris B • talk 10:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The Church of Jesus Christ official logo

I just added a fair use template for the logo on The Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite)'s official page, is there anything else I can/should do to help this template stay and be beneficial here on Wiki? I certainly do not want it to be deleted...71.58.63.246 04:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

First, thank you for taking the time to add a rationale, and for inquiring here!  :) Second, looks good to me. I'll go remove the "di-disputed fair use rationale" template now. Cheers, Iamunknown 05:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Leeward Islands and Windward Islands flags

I replaced the two very small low-res current flags with ones that I have made. I have taken those flags and coat of arms off wikipedia, yet I cropped them and chopped them to create the flag. I don't really know what license to use. Please help - Gibbsyspin 05:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

OLD photos, what do I do?I

I have a large collection of OLD, black and white and sepia images of scientists/naturalists from the 19th and 20th centuries. I have been uploading the oldest ones, circa 1865 to 1870 where for sure the photographers are all dead over 100 years! I have put photographer's names, where they are known - most are not.

Every single one of these images has been flagged!

File:FBMeekphoto1868.jpg

These are the most recent two. Please help! I'd love to put up more portraits of these very old individuals, but I am getting more than frustrated by the system. I appreciate copyrights, too. I am a photographer and I have a website. But honestly, these photos are LONG past copyright! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellin Beltz (talk • contribs) 06:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

If these photographs were published before 1923, than they are in the public domain in the United States and you should use these tags: {{PD-US}}. The tag for the author who has most likely died is okay if it has been 100 years since he passed away but it needs the source info (where did you get the photograph?). Once a source has been put down, remove the deletion notice and everything should be ok. Hope this helps. --Hdt83 ^Chat 06:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Divine-Comedy-National-Express-CD1.jpg

I have resubmitted the material with a smaller web version of the image along with all of the details about the image including original location and additional features, what else would I have to complete to allow this to be acceptable on wikipedia

SeveredSpirit 13:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)