m Format for Winged Fist's reply. |
→File:LIC Coat of Arms.jpg: reply to Winged Fist |
||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
:This image of the Long Island City Coat of Arms is the official coat of arms from 1873, from the collection of the Greater Astoria Historical Society. This exact image does not currently appear on their website, which is under construction. But this is a b/w version of the image that appears at http://www.astorialic.org/topics/coatofarms_p.php. The GAHS has released this image, so should it be PD-US or PD-OLD? Thanks, [[User:Winged Fist|Winged Fist]] ([[User talk:Winged Fist|talk]]) 05:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC) |
:This image of the Long Island City Coat of Arms is the official coat of arms from 1873, from the collection of the Greater Astoria Historical Society. This exact image does not currently appear on their website, which is under construction. But this is a b/w version of the image that appears at http://www.astorialic.org/topics/coatofarms_p.php. The GAHS has released this image, so should it be PD-US or PD-OLD? Thanks, [[User:Winged Fist|Winged Fist]] ([[User talk:Winged Fist|talk]]) 05:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC) |
||
::If this particular image was published in 1873 (or any time before 1923), it's in the public domain and there's no need for further discussion (but the image would still need an accurate license template). If, on the other hand, the Astoria Historical Society has a valid claim to a copyright on the image (for example, if the artwork in this particular image was done by a club member in 1943), then I believe that Wikipedia would need some sort of affidavit that it has been released under a Creative Commons license (but note that I'm not well informed on that procedure). If the image is newer than 1923, it still might be OK to use in the Long Island City article under "fair use", but other uses would be restricted. --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 05:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:37, 27 January 2009
January 25
File:Fricke and DFV 78 in 1903.jpg
Propably an expiered copyright, given its from 1903, but I'm not certain now, should better be deleted after all. Uploaded by myself, not used in any article, was meant for the Ferdinand-Wilhelm Fricke article. EA210269 (talk) 04:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
File:OJL-Rgts Pk 08.2007.jpg
Listed as CC-by-3.0 but is linked to a flickr image with (c) all-rights reserved Peripitus (Talk) 08:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Dsie17: I have changed the copyright licence on my flickr site now, so presume all is fine now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsie17 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
File:Succubus.JPG
File:Patrick Doyle December 2005.jpg
reason this image is non-free Musamies (talk) 17:00, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
File:LIC Coat of Arms.jpg
Uploader stated that image is released under Creative Commons. A website (www.astorialic.org) is cited as the source, but that website does not say that images on the site are released under CC. Anyway, this particular image is not found on the website; a similar image is at http://www.astorialic.org/topics/coatofarms_p.php . That page indicates that the coat of arms was created in 1873, which suggests that the image could be PD-US or PD-OLD (but not Creative Commons). This particular version may or may not be free. Orlady (talk) 20:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- This image of the Long Island City Coat of Arms is the official coat of arms from 1873, from the collection of the Greater Astoria Historical Society. This exact image does not currently appear on their website, which is under construction. But this is a b/w version of the image that appears at http://www.astorialic.org/topics/coatofarms_p.php. The GAHS has released this image, so should it be PD-US or PD-OLD? Thanks, Winged Fist (talk) 05:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- If this particular image was published in 1873 (or any time before 1923), it's in the public domain and there's no need for further discussion (but the image would still need an accurate license template). If, on the other hand, the Astoria Historical Society has a valid claim to a copyright on the image (for example, if the artwork in this particular image was done by a club member in 1943), then I believe that Wikipedia would need some sort of affidavit that it has been released under a Creative Commons license (but note that I'm not well informed on that procedure). If the image is newer than 1923, it still might be OK to use in the Long Island City article under "fair use", but other uses would be restricted. --Orlady (talk) 05:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)