| 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.
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.
| ||
(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge) |
|---|
|
||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Does File:Lincoln Chafee 2020 presidential campaign logo.webp really need to be treated as non-free simply due to the Statue of Liberty imagery used as the "i" in "Lincoln"? If it does, then it probably fails WP:NFCCP based on it's current use. For reference, I asked the same at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2023/August#Statue of Liberty imagery and just want to double check. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 13:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- The drawing of the Statue of Liberty is at least arguably creative enough to pass TOO; I think it goes beyond "simple geometric shapes". I certainly would not be comfortable marking it PD-logo. I would agree that it fails NFCC; if nothing else it does not have a nonfree rationale for the article it's currently used in, and I don't think a good one could be written. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Looking to use a picture for a non-living person, and can't find a commons picture of her. I believe all fair-use requirements to have been met (for any of the ones listed). Is this the right place to ask.
I am looking to add a picture of Olivia Frank on english Wikipedia. For rather obvious reasons, a new picture cannot be taken, and I can't find any existing pictures that are usable per commons.
Would any/every one of those meet the requirements for fair use? I believe this to be the case, but am rather inexperienced with this sort of media.
- https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/trans-mossad-spy-who-helped-track-down-the-munich-terrorists-is-laid-to-rest-brocccl6
- https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/mossad-spy-identifies-neo-nazi-konrad
- https://confidentials.com/manchester/the-olivia-frank-story-manchesters-transgender-spy
Thank you :) FortunateSons ( talk) 09:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- @
FortunateSons I see no reason this wouldn't be allowed. Consider the book-cover
[1] an option. Pick the one you think would be the best lead-image, and upload it at
WP:FUW - "Upload a non-free file".
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk) 10:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much :) FortunateSons ( talk) 10:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello everyone! I noticed that this file is copyrighted and I would like to use it for the article "Torture" in the Vietnamese Wikipedia project. Can I upload it to the Vietnamese Wikipedia with full copyright details like the English version? Hope to get some help! Have a nice day! Phong Dang ( talk) 04:09, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @
P. ĐĂNG You'll have to ask on the Vietnamese Wikipedia.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk) 08:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
-
Gråbergs Gråa Sång Some members knowledgeable in this field on Vietnamese Wikipedia are currently inactive. At the Vietnamese Wikipedia project, when downloading a copyrighted image from the English Wikipedia, I often copy the entire copyright attribution of the English version to the Vietnamese version. I'm wondering if I can make the above file this way?
Phong Dang (
talk) 08:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Depends what the fair use rules on vi-WP are, and I have no idea. My impression is that en-WP is comparatively liberal in this regard. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 09:01, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
-
Toohool Can you join this discussion?
Phong Dang (
talk) 08:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @ P. ĐĂNG: It depends on Vietnamese Wikipedia's copyright policy. The photo is public domain in the US, but some wikis require that files also be public domain in the country where most of that wiki's editors are located. If Vietnamese Wikipedia has that policy, then we have to look at Vietnamese copyright law, which would protect this photo for 75 years from publication, which is 2044. (Though the photo may also be allowable as non-free content, depending on Vietnamese Wikipedia's version of WP:NFCC and on how you intend to use it). Toohool ( talk) 15:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
-
Gråbergs Gråa Sång Some members knowledgeable in this field on Vietnamese Wikipedia are currently inactive. At the Vietnamese Wikipedia project, when downloading a copyrighted image from the English Wikipedia, I often copy the entire copyright attribution of the English version to the Vietnamese version. I'm wondering if I can make the above file this way?
Phong Dang (
talk) 08:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- For information, this photo is discussed
on Commons. --
Asclepias (
talk) 23:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- The file on Commons is restored. -- Asclepias ( talk) 02:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Greetings. I found an image I'd like to upload. It's a crop/screen shot of an image of a dancing shaman woman from the disappearing Nivkh culture. The dancer is Chiyo Nakamura. The image appears numbered 019 on PDF page 69 (publication page number 64)(bottom right). I'm hopeful the image I found qualifies under some licensure (non-copyrighted, free use?)
Here's the image provenance: the actual author (photographer) is unknown. The publisher of the document that contains this image is the Osaka National Museum of Ethnology. The author of the publication containing the image, Chuner Taksami, obtained the image from the "personal collection" of a former (different, defunct) museum director (Yonemura Tetsuhide), a private individual who is/was the apparent owner. Whose property is it when I crop a page from the government publication (with this provenance)? How does no-copyright or fair use smell to you? FWIW it appears everyone involved except the Osaka museum is now dead. Thanks for your input! JFHJr ( ㊟) 21:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- PS. The photographer snapped the photo "in the 1950s" per Chuner (I find him reliable). His government-published work is from 2004. Cheers.
JFHJr (
㊟) 22:27, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Is Nakamura still living? The article states he was born in 1906 and refers to him using the past tense, but it doesn't provide any reliably sourced verifiable information about his death. Before trying to add an image of him to the article, it might be better to first find a reliable source regarding his death.
Wikipedia's non-free content use policy doesn't, in principle, allow
non-free images of still living persons to be used, absent some prettylimited circumstances; so, if it can be verified that Nakamura has died, then a photo still under copyright protection could be used as long as its use satisfies all
ten non-free content use criteria. If, however, Nakamura is still alive, then a non-free photo becomes much harder to justify and it would be better to try a find a freely licensed or public domain photo of him to use instead.Different governments have different copyright laws and not everything you find in a government publication is free from copyright restrictions just because it's in a government publication. Moreover, the fact that "everyone involved in now dead" doesn't automatically mean the photo is no longer under copyright protection because intellectual property rights, like most other assests, can be transferred to others either through a formal transfer agreement or as part of an inheritence. The photographer who took the photo is going to be considered the copyright holder. If the photographer is dead, then it's possible their heirs or maybe even the museun now own the rights to the photo. The
first publication of the photo also matters when assessing copyright status; so, if the photo was first published in 2004 (even though the author may have died many years before), that could be when the copyright countdown clock starts so to speak. For example,
under US copyright law, works orginating in the US which have an unknown author and which are first published in 2003 or later are eligible for copyright protect for 120 years the after the date of creation or 95 years after the date of publication, whichever comes first. In this case, though, the subject of the photo is Japanese so
c:COM:JAPAN might be relevant as well if the photographer is/was Japanese, the document you linked to above seems to be in Russian, which also means
c:COM:RUSSIA might also be relevant if that was the first time the photo was published.Unless the photo clearly originated with the publisher of the document, it's best to sssume it came form somewhere else which means the copyright laws of mutliple coutnies might need to be considered. The author/publisher of the document might have received permission to use the photo, but it can't be assumed that permission extends to any other third-party like Wikipedia unless it explicity states so. For this reason, it might be a good idea to ask about this at
c:COM:VPC because Commons is a global (i.e. multi-lingual) project and there might someone who understands Russian there who can help sort things out. English Wikipedia is mainly only concerned with US copyright law with respect to content it hosts, and the photos in that document don't seem to be eligible for hosting on English Wikipedia in any way other than non-free use. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 02:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- According to ja-WP, Nakamura died in 1969. If there's a decent source for that, uploading locally at en-WP at
WP:FUW as non-free shouldn't be a problem.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk) 08:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I saw that and removed it after I couldn't find it in a reliable source. I reached out for a date or year of death on ja-wiki. JFHJr ( ㊟) 22:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, I found a good source for the 1969 DOD. I'll work on the upload later this week or this weekend as time permits. Thanks,
Gråbergs Gråa Sång!
JFHJr (
㊟) 04:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- @ JFHJr: You're not required to do so, but I suggest using the copyright license {{ Non-free biog pic}} and the non-free use rationale {{ Non-free use rationale biog}} for the file if you're going to upload it as non-free. You might not be allowed to do so at first if you use the upload wizard, but you can modify the license and the rationale after the file has been uploaded. Try to fill in the parameters of the non-free use rationale template as much as possible and as accurately as possible. It would also be helpful if you could provide a link to the publication's general copyright page as the "general source" and a link to the specific page the photo can be found on as the "direct source" to make it easier for others to find both the photo and its licensing. If you Google how to link to a specific pdf page, you should be able to figure it out. When I click on the link, it downloads the pdf to my computer. This could just be my setting or it could be something at the source. Whatever the reason is, it's not really desirable and it's better for the source to open up when clicked. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- And done, I think. Thanks! JFHJr ( ㊟) 20:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- According to ja-WP, Nakamura died in 1969. If there's a decent source for that, uploading locally at en-WP at
WP:FUW as non-free shouldn't be a problem.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk) 08:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Is Nakamura still living? The article states he was born in 1906 and refers to him using the past tense, but it doesn't provide any reliably sourced verifiable information about his death. Before trying to add an image of him to the article, it might be better to first find a reliable source regarding his death.
Wikipedia's non-free content use policy doesn't, in principle, allow
non-free images of still living persons to be used, absent some prettylimited circumstances; so, if it can be verified that Nakamura has died, then a photo still under copyright protection could be used as long as its use satisfies all
ten non-free content use criteria. If, however, Nakamura is still alive, then a non-free photo becomes much harder to justify and it would be better to try a find a freely licensed or public domain photo of him to use instead.Different governments have different copyright laws and not everything you find in a government publication is free from copyright restrictions just because it's in a government publication. Moreover, the fact that "everyone involved in now dead" doesn't automatically mean the photo is no longer under copyright protection because intellectual property rights, like most other assests, can be transferred to others either through a formal transfer agreement or as part of an inheritence. The photographer who took the photo is going to be considered the copyright holder. If the photographer is dead, then it's possible their heirs or maybe even the museun now own the rights to the photo. The
first publication of the photo also matters when assessing copyright status; so, if the photo was first published in 2004 (even though the author may have died many years before), that could be when the copyright countdown clock starts so to speak. For example,
under US copyright law, works orginating in the US which have an unknown author and which are first published in 2003 or later are eligible for copyright protect for 120 years the after the date of creation or 95 years after the date of publication, whichever comes first. In this case, though, the subject of the photo is Japanese so
c:COM:JAPAN might be relevant as well if the photographer is/was Japanese, the document you linked to above seems to be in Russian, which also means
c:COM:RUSSIA might also be relevant if that was the first time the photo was published.Unless the photo clearly originated with the publisher of the document, it's best to sssume it came form somewhere else which means the copyright laws of mutliple coutnies might need to be considered. The author/publisher of the document might have received permission to use the photo, but it can't be assumed that permission extends to any other third-party like Wikipedia unless it explicity states so. For this reason, it might be a good idea to ask about this at
c:COM:VPC because Commons is a global (i.e. multi-lingual) project and there might someone who understands Russian there who can help sort things out. English Wikipedia is mainly only concerned with US copyright law with respect to content it hosts, and the photos in that document don't seem to be eligible for hosting on English Wikipedia in any way other than non-free use. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 02:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Two album covers at Selos (Shaira song)
Is it acceptable – in the context of WP:Non-free content – to have two album covers in an article of a song, like the article Selos (Shaira song)? One album (at the infobox) is of 2024 while the other is the first album (when the song was first released in 2023). JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 01:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, This is a great image, but I have some doubt about the copyright claim. If it was renewed, should it be by Margaret Bourke-White or by Life? Thanks, Yann ( talk) 18:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Probably not OK. See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:American way of life.jpg. Yann ( talk) 11:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi there, Can someone please let me know how to fix /info/en/?search=File:Locks_quest_DS_screenshot.jpg so that it doesn't get autoremoved from Lock's Quest? I thought I had provided a rationale but the bot doesn't think so. Thanks. GraziePrego ( talk) 05:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Greetings, I think the problem is that the rationale needs to link to the article it applies to, which your rationale doesn't. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 09:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Copyright status of two 1949 Vancouver Sun photos
- Harrington, Lyn (1949-12-03). "Skagway Teams Up With Robert Service". Vancouver Sun. Archived from the original on 2024-04-27. Retrieved 2024-04-27 – via Newspapers.com.
What is the copyright status of the two photos taken by Richard Harrington and published in 1949 in the Vancouver Sun? Could they be in the public domain? Cunard ( talk) 01:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- It would depend on where they were first published. If in Canada, they would probably still be protected by copyright in Canada and the US; if earlier or simultaneous publication in Alaska can be found without both notice and renewal, then it would be in the public domain in the US.
Felix QW (
talk) 07:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Richard Harrington (1911–2005) was a Canadian photographer. I think this was published only in Canada for this publication. I did not find any earlier or simultaneous publication in Alaska. This is probably still copyrighted. Thank you for checking! Cunard ( talk) 09:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Copyright status of two 1963 Michigan Quarterly Review drawings
- Baxter, Dow V. (Spring 1963). "A Toast to Skagway". Michigan Quarterly Review. Vol. 2, no. 2. pp. 118, 120. Retrieved 2024-04-27.
What is the copyright status of the two 1963 Michigan Quarterly Review drawings on pages 118 and 120 of this article? Could they be in the public domain under commons:Template:PD-US-not renewed? I checked this link, which says:
First renewed issue: no issue renewals found in registered works database First renewed contribution in: Summer 1964; see registered works database
Additional note
The Summer 1964 issue is the first to have a contribution renewal explicitly filed, but all issues and contributions copyrighted in 1964 or later would have automatically renewed copyrights.
Cunard ( talk) 01:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- In my experience, the UPenn database you consulted is very reliable, and it seems as if the drawings are original drawings for that paper. So I would say they should be fine!
Felix QW (
talk) 07:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for confirming! I've uploaded the drawings and added them to commons:Category:The Days of '98 Show. Cunard ( talk) 09:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
| 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.
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.
| ||
(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge) |
|---|
|
||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Does File:Lincoln Chafee 2020 presidential campaign logo.webp really need to be treated as non-free simply due to the Statue of Liberty imagery used as the "i" in "Lincoln"? If it does, then it probably fails WP:NFCCP based on it's current use. For reference, I asked the same at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2023/August#Statue of Liberty imagery and just want to double check. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 13:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- The drawing of the Statue of Liberty is at least arguably creative enough to pass TOO; I think it goes beyond "simple geometric shapes". I certainly would not be comfortable marking it PD-logo. I would agree that it fails NFCC; if nothing else it does not have a nonfree rationale for the article it's currently used in, and I don't think a good one could be written. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Looking to use a picture for a non-living person, and can't find a commons picture of her. I believe all fair-use requirements to have been met (for any of the ones listed). Is this the right place to ask.
I am looking to add a picture of Olivia Frank on english Wikipedia. For rather obvious reasons, a new picture cannot be taken, and I can't find any existing pictures that are usable per commons.
Would any/every one of those meet the requirements for fair use? I believe this to be the case, but am rather inexperienced with this sort of media.
- https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/trans-mossad-spy-who-helped-track-down-the-munich-terrorists-is-laid-to-rest-brocccl6
- https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/mossad-spy-identifies-neo-nazi-konrad
- https://confidentials.com/manchester/the-olivia-frank-story-manchesters-transgender-spy
Thank you :) FortunateSons ( talk) 09:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- @
FortunateSons I see no reason this wouldn't be allowed. Consider the book-cover
[1] an option. Pick the one you think would be the best lead-image, and upload it at
WP:FUW - "Upload a non-free file".
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk) 10:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much :) FortunateSons ( talk) 10:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello everyone! I noticed that this file is copyrighted and I would like to use it for the article "Torture" in the Vietnamese Wikipedia project. Can I upload it to the Vietnamese Wikipedia with full copyright details like the English version? Hope to get some help! Have a nice day! Phong Dang ( talk) 04:09, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @
P. ĐĂNG You'll have to ask on the Vietnamese Wikipedia.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk) 08:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
-
Gråbergs Gråa Sång Some members knowledgeable in this field on Vietnamese Wikipedia are currently inactive. At the Vietnamese Wikipedia project, when downloading a copyrighted image from the English Wikipedia, I often copy the entire copyright attribution of the English version to the Vietnamese version. I'm wondering if I can make the above file this way?
Phong Dang (
talk) 08:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Depends what the fair use rules on vi-WP are, and I have no idea. My impression is that en-WP is comparatively liberal in this regard. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 09:01, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
-
Toohool Can you join this discussion?
Phong Dang (
talk) 08:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @ P. ĐĂNG: It depends on Vietnamese Wikipedia's copyright policy. The photo is public domain in the US, but some wikis require that files also be public domain in the country where most of that wiki's editors are located. If Vietnamese Wikipedia has that policy, then we have to look at Vietnamese copyright law, which would protect this photo for 75 years from publication, which is 2044. (Though the photo may also be allowable as non-free content, depending on Vietnamese Wikipedia's version of WP:NFCC and on how you intend to use it). Toohool ( talk) 15:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
-
Gråbergs Gråa Sång Some members knowledgeable in this field on Vietnamese Wikipedia are currently inactive. At the Vietnamese Wikipedia project, when downloading a copyrighted image from the English Wikipedia, I often copy the entire copyright attribution of the English version to the Vietnamese version. I'm wondering if I can make the above file this way?
Phong Dang (
talk) 08:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- For information, this photo is discussed
on Commons. --
Asclepias (
talk) 23:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- The file on Commons is restored. -- Asclepias ( talk) 02:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Greetings. I found an image I'd like to upload. It's a crop/screen shot of an image of a dancing shaman woman from the disappearing Nivkh culture. The dancer is Chiyo Nakamura. The image appears numbered 019 on PDF page 69 (publication page number 64)(bottom right). I'm hopeful the image I found qualifies under some licensure (non-copyrighted, free use?)
Here's the image provenance: the actual author (photographer) is unknown. The publisher of the document that contains this image is the Osaka National Museum of Ethnology. The author of the publication containing the image, Chuner Taksami, obtained the image from the "personal collection" of a former (different, defunct) museum director (Yonemura Tetsuhide), a private individual who is/was the apparent owner. Whose property is it when I crop a page from the government publication (with this provenance)? How does no-copyright or fair use smell to you? FWIW it appears everyone involved except the Osaka museum is now dead. Thanks for your input! JFHJr ( ㊟) 21:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- PS. The photographer snapped the photo "in the 1950s" per Chuner (I find him reliable). His government-published work is from 2004. Cheers.
JFHJr (
㊟) 22:27, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Is Nakamura still living? The article states he was born in 1906 and refers to him using the past tense, but it doesn't provide any reliably sourced verifiable information about his death. Before trying to add an image of him to the article, it might be better to first find a reliable source regarding his death.
Wikipedia's non-free content use policy doesn't, in principle, allow
non-free images of still living persons to be used, absent some prettylimited circumstances; so, if it can be verified that Nakamura has died, then a photo still under copyright protection could be used as long as its use satisfies all
ten non-free content use criteria. If, however, Nakamura is still alive, then a non-free photo becomes much harder to justify and it would be better to try a find a freely licensed or public domain photo of him to use instead.Different governments have different copyright laws and not everything you find in a government publication is free from copyright restrictions just because it's in a government publication. Moreover, the fact that "everyone involved in now dead" doesn't automatically mean the photo is no longer under copyright protection because intellectual property rights, like most other assests, can be transferred to others either through a formal transfer agreement or as part of an inheritence. The photographer who took the photo is going to be considered the copyright holder. If the photographer is dead, then it's possible their heirs or maybe even the museun now own the rights to the photo. The
first publication of the photo also matters when assessing copyright status; so, if the photo was first published in 2004 (even though the author may have died many years before), that could be when the copyright countdown clock starts so to speak. For example,
under US copyright law, works orginating in the US which have an unknown author and which are first published in 2003 or later are eligible for copyright protect for 120 years the after the date of creation or 95 years after the date of publication, whichever comes first. In this case, though, the subject of the photo is Japanese so
c:COM:JAPAN might be relevant as well if the photographer is/was Japanese, the document you linked to above seems to be in Russian, which also means
c:COM:RUSSIA might also be relevant if that was the first time the photo was published.Unless the photo clearly originated with the publisher of the document, it's best to sssume it came form somewhere else which means the copyright laws of mutliple coutnies might need to be considered. The author/publisher of the document might have received permission to use the photo, but it can't be assumed that permission extends to any other third-party like Wikipedia unless it explicity states so. For this reason, it might be a good idea to ask about this at
c:COM:VPC because Commons is a global (i.e. multi-lingual) project and there might someone who understands Russian there who can help sort things out. English Wikipedia is mainly only concerned with US copyright law with respect to content it hosts, and the photos in that document don't seem to be eligible for hosting on English Wikipedia in any way other than non-free use. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 02:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- According to ja-WP, Nakamura died in 1969. If there's a decent source for that, uploading locally at en-WP at
WP:FUW as non-free shouldn't be a problem.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk) 08:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I saw that and removed it after I couldn't find it in a reliable source. I reached out for a date or year of death on ja-wiki. JFHJr ( ㊟) 22:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, I found a good source for the 1969 DOD. I'll work on the upload later this week or this weekend as time permits. Thanks,
Gråbergs Gråa Sång!
JFHJr (
㊟) 04:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- @ JFHJr: You're not required to do so, but I suggest using the copyright license {{ Non-free biog pic}} and the non-free use rationale {{ Non-free use rationale biog}} for the file if you're going to upload it as non-free. You might not be allowed to do so at first if you use the upload wizard, but you can modify the license and the rationale after the file has been uploaded. Try to fill in the parameters of the non-free use rationale template as much as possible and as accurately as possible. It would also be helpful if you could provide a link to the publication's general copyright page as the "general source" and a link to the specific page the photo can be found on as the "direct source" to make it easier for others to find both the photo and its licensing. If you Google how to link to a specific pdf page, you should be able to figure it out. When I click on the link, it downloads the pdf to my computer. This could just be my setting or it could be something at the source. Whatever the reason is, it's not really desirable and it's better for the source to open up when clicked. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- And done, I think. Thanks! JFHJr ( ㊟) 20:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- According to ja-WP, Nakamura died in 1969. If there's a decent source for that, uploading locally at en-WP at
WP:FUW as non-free shouldn't be a problem.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk) 08:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Is Nakamura still living? The article states he was born in 1906 and refers to him using the past tense, but it doesn't provide any reliably sourced verifiable information about his death. Before trying to add an image of him to the article, it might be better to first find a reliable source regarding his death.
Wikipedia's non-free content use policy doesn't, in principle, allow
non-free images of still living persons to be used, absent some prettylimited circumstances; so, if it can be verified that Nakamura has died, then a photo still under copyright protection could be used as long as its use satisfies all
ten non-free content use criteria. If, however, Nakamura is still alive, then a non-free photo becomes much harder to justify and it would be better to try a find a freely licensed or public domain photo of him to use instead.Different governments have different copyright laws and not everything you find in a government publication is free from copyright restrictions just because it's in a government publication. Moreover, the fact that "everyone involved in now dead" doesn't automatically mean the photo is no longer under copyright protection because intellectual property rights, like most other assests, can be transferred to others either through a formal transfer agreement or as part of an inheritence. The photographer who took the photo is going to be considered the copyright holder. If the photographer is dead, then it's possible their heirs or maybe even the museun now own the rights to the photo. The
first publication of the photo also matters when assessing copyright status; so, if the photo was first published in 2004 (even though the author may have died many years before), that could be when the copyright countdown clock starts so to speak. For example,
under US copyright law, works orginating in the US which have an unknown author and which are first published in 2003 or later are eligible for copyright protect for 120 years the after the date of creation or 95 years after the date of publication, whichever comes first. In this case, though, the subject of the photo is Japanese so
c:COM:JAPAN might be relevant as well if the photographer is/was Japanese, the document you linked to above seems to be in Russian, which also means
c:COM:RUSSIA might also be relevant if that was the first time the photo was published.Unless the photo clearly originated with the publisher of the document, it's best to sssume it came form somewhere else which means the copyright laws of mutliple coutnies might need to be considered. The author/publisher of the document might have received permission to use the photo, but it can't be assumed that permission extends to any other third-party like Wikipedia unless it explicity states so. For this reason, it might be a good idea to ask about this at
c:COM:VPC because Commons is a global (i.e. multi-lingual) project and there might someone who understands Russian there who can help sort things out. English Wikipedia is mainly only concerned with US copyright law with respect to content it hosts, and the photos in that document don't seem to be eligible for hosting on English Wikipedia in any way other than non-free use. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 02:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Two album covers at Selos (Shaira song)
Is it acceptable – in the context of WP:Non-free content – to have two album covers in an article of a song, like the article Selos (Shaira song)? One album (at the infobox) is of 2024 while the other is the first album (when the song was first released in 2023). JWilz12345 ( Talk| Contrib's.) 01:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, This is a great image, but I have some doubt about the copyright claim. If it was renewed, should it be by Margaret Bourke-White or by Life? Thanks, Yann ( talk) 18:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Probably not OK. See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:American way of life.jpg. Yann ( talk) 11:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi there, Can someone please let me know how to fix /info/en/?search=File:Locks_quest_DS_screenshot.jpg so that it doesn't get autoremoved from Lock's Quest? I thought I had provided a rationale but the bot doesn't think so. Thanks. GraziePrego ( talk) 05:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Greetings, I think the problem is that the rationale needs to link to the article it applies to, which your rationale doesn't. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 09:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Copyright status of two 1949 Vancouver Sun photos
- Harrington, Lyn (1949-12-03). "Skagway Teams Up With Robert Service". Vancouver Sun. Archived from the original on 2024-04-27. Retrieved 2024-04-27 – via Newspapers.com.
What is the copyright status of the two photos taken by Richard Harrington and published in 1949 in the Vancouver Sun? Could they be in the public domain? Cunard ( talk) 01:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- It would depend on where they were first published. If in Canada, they would probably still be protected by copyright in Canada and the US; if earlier or simultaneous publication in Alaska can be found without both notice and renewal, then it would be in the public domain in the US.
Felix QW (
talk) 07:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Richard Harrington (1911–2005) was a Canadian photographer. I think this was published only in Canada for this publication. I did not find any earlier or simultaneous publication in Alaska. This is probably still copyrighted. Thank you for checking! Cunard ( talk) 09:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Copyright status of two 1963 Michigan Quarterly Review drawings
- Baxter, Dow V. (Spring 1963). "A Toast to Skagway". Michigan Quarterly Review. Vol. 2, no. 2. pp. 118, 120. Retrieved 2024-04-27.
What is the copyright status of the two 1963 Michigan Quarterly Review drawings on pages 118 and 120 of this article? Could they be in the public domain under commons:Template:PD-US-not renewed? I checked this link, which says:
First renewed issue: no issue renewals found in registered works database First renewed contribution in: Summer 1964; see registered works database
Additional note
The Summer 1964 issue is the first to have a contribution renewal explicitly filed, but all issues and contributions copyrighted in 1964 or later would have automatically renewed copyrights.
Cunard ( talk) 01:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- In my experience, the UPenn database you consulted is very reliable, and it seems as if the drawings are original drawings for that paper. So I would say they should be fine!
Felix QW (
talk) 07:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for confirming! I've uploaded the drawings and added them to commons:Category:The Days of '98 Show. Cunard ( talk) 09:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)