|
(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge) |
---|
![]() Archives |
||
---|---|---|
|
||
- 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:Image copyright tags, choose the appropriate tag:
- For work you created yourself, use one of the ones listed under the heading "For image creators".
- For a work downloaded from the internet, please understand that the vast majority of images from the internet are not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. Exceptions include images from flickr that have an acceptable license, images that are in the public domain because of their age or because they were created by the United States federal government, or images used under a claim of fair use. If you do not know what you are doing, please post a link to the image here and ask BEFORE uploading it.
- For an image created by someone else who has licensed their image under the GFDL, an acceptable Creative Commons license, or has released their image into the public domain, this permission must be documented. Please see Requesting copyright permission for more information.
- Type the name of the tag (e.g.; {{GFDL-self}}), not forgetting {{ before and }} after, in the edit box on the image's description page.
- Remove any existing tag complaining that the image has no tag (for example, {{untagged}})
- Hit Save page.
- 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 ask your question" link above.
- 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.
Contents
- 1 NataliaLuis.JPG
- 2 Flickr photo permissions problem
- 3 hate speech and media
- 4 do I have an appropriate permission to post an image from Caltech Archives onto Wikipedia?
- 5 Charles W. Phifer image
- 6 These pics uploaded to Commons via Cross-Wiki are copyright infringement
- 7 Not sure this is really fair-use
- 8 Major Tom
NataliaLuis.JPG
NataliaLuis.JPG I am the owner of this picture, it has been removed a few times from the Profile Box of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalia_Luis-Bassa
I own the pic, please tell me the right tag to be able to appear on the Profile Box!
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urregoluis (talk • contribs) 17:29, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Urregoluis: Did you take this picture? If so, under what circumstances? (It looks like there have been a variety of photos with different filenames but I see one that you uploaded that is a B&W portrait of her -- I'm assuming you're referring to that.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:14, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Urregoluis: Actually, Urregoluis, there may be bigger problems here. It looks like your real name is Veronica Urrego, but you have uploaded photos that you credit to Roger Kemp, Andres Landino, and others. Are you authorized to upload their images here? If so, why? And are all of the images you tagged as your own work actually taken by you? Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:19, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- I concur. I look at www.andreslandino.com, and see a very prominent warning " ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Reproduction of any content of this website is forbidden without my written permission ANDRES LANDINO". We do not have written permission. Such images can't be kept here. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:22, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Flickr photo permissions problem
Can anyone tell me what's wrong with File:Horizon Organic Fat-Free Milk 1 gallon.jpg? That photo, in the "Summary" section, has a link labelled "Permission" that leads to https://www.flickr.com/photos/76969036@N02/8216045310 . On that page there is a link labelled "Some rights reserved" that leads to https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ . But it's been tagged for speedy deletion because of permission problems. What did I do wrong? Kendall-K1 (talk) 10:13, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- I think you have faithfully copied the flickr permission. However the picture is of a milk bottle, and someone else probably owns copyright on the label prominently pcitured. We need permission and or a license from Horizon Organic. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:03, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- I doubt it. For one thing that's not what the tag says. Maybe it's mis-tagged. Can you point to WP policy that says we would need a license from Horizon? Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:51, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- Copyright is complex. If I took a picture of an existing creative work, that is a considered a derivative work. While I have the ability to copyright and license my photograph the way I see, I am still interferring with the rights of the original copyright owner of the item I photographed. So while I may license the image freely under a CC-BY clause, the work can still be considered non-free because of the original item's copyright. That's what is happening here, the Flickr uploader has allowed their image to be shared CC-BY, but it still is a derivative work and the original copyright of Horizon has precedence in determining non-free. --MASEM (t) 21:00, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- I doubt it. For one thing that's not what the tag says. Maybe it's mis-tagged. Can you point to WP policy that says we would need a license from Horizon? Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:51, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Besides the derivative image copyright issue mentioned above by Masem, the use of the image File:Horizon Organic Fat-Free Milk 1 gallon.jpg in two article does nothing to enhance that articles. In Gallon it add nothing special that a generic one gallon milk container would add, so this particular image is unnecessary and in Horizon Organic there is already a company logo in the infobox, so the image of a one gallon container that has essentially the same logo on it adds nothing to the article that can not be provided by prose alone. In fact there no mention of the type of containers the company uses, so it is redundant. BTW, here is quite a nice freely licenced image of some gallon milk containers which can be uploaded to the commons. ww2censor (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- A milk bottle is not subject to copyright protection. See [1]. But I'm more interested in seeing the WP policy that you base this on. Kendall-K1 (talk) 23:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- It's not the bottle - as you point out, you cannot copyright the shape of an object that has some utility like containers, furniture, cars, etc. But the graphics on the label is what is the issue, that's copyrightable. There's no direct policy I can point to , just knowing how copyright law work, but I would direct your attention to Commons' page on De minimis, which points out where sometimes copyrightable elements can be in a photograph and not considered to be a derivative work, but this requires the elements to be not the focus of the image; in this picture, the label is definitely a centerpiece of the image. --MASEM (t) 23:33, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- (edit conflict) See Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Derivative works - the image of a plain bottle is not subject to copyright but the image of a bottle that has a copyright logo on it makes it a copyright image, known as a derivative work and that does require the permission of the copyright holder, hence my suggestion to use an image that has not copyright information on it and avoid the problem. Besides which Flickr users are able to apply any licence they like to an image but it may not be correct, as is the case for this image which is why uploads are reviewed to verify their copyright status. ww2censor (talk) 23:40, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- I'll give a different answer from the others, but unfortunately it will also lead to the conclusion that the image is unusable on Wikimedia. If the question had been only the usual "label on a whole bottle" situation, I'd have suggested to forget about uploading the file to Wikipedia and to try uploading the file to Commons, where it may have been accepted per the type of precedents you mentioned, although going from a glass bottle of vodka to a plastic gallon of milk is a step, but the principle could be the same. But before we even consider the pictured object, the first thing that should trigger alarm bells is that this flickr account is strange and probably cannot be trusted. I can't figure out what the account gains with the lot of multiple copies of images, but a large proportion of the images of products seem copies of marketing photographs, probably from the websites of the companies. Many images even have the marks of their sources. So, the photographs are probably not the works of the owner of the flickr account and if so the license tags are not valid. -- Asclepias (talk) 04:02, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
- I think you're right. Now what do I do? Kendall-K1 (talk) 11:22, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Well I gave some pretty good pointers in my first post above. File:Horizon Organic Fat-Free Milk 1 gallon.jpg will be deleted. ww2censor (talk) 11:42, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
hate speech and media
The je suis charlie hebdo holds a cover page picture of 2015 issue which ahould.be removed from wikipedia as it gurts tge sentimemts of muslims and can cause an uproar. Please remove it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiajiajiajia123 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- Jiajiajiajia123: Please see Wikipedia is not censored. -- zzuuzz (talk) 22:48, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
do I have an appropriate permission to post an image from Caltech Archives onto Wikipedia?
I have obtained written permission from the Caltech Archive to use an image from their archive on the Wikipedia "Blood Lead level" page.
The image can be viewed on the Caltech Archive website http://archives-dc.library.caltech.edu/islandora/object/ct1%3A1924
The signed "Materials Release" agreement between me and Caltech Archive, in which Caltech Archives agrees to allow me to post this image on the Wikipedia Blood Lead level page is here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B34DzaODYbePNXE1LVBzYjlOaUE/view?usp=sharing
Is this an appropriate permission in order for me to go ahead and post this image on the Wikipedia Blood Lead level page?
Jrandomcanuck (talk) 17:32, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Jrandomcanuck. This won't do because it doesn't identify the actual copyright owner, or the place where the figures were first published. And a release only for Wikipedia isn't enough. We need a license that permits reuse by anyone for any purpose, requiring only that reusers attribute the source. See Creative Commons licenses. The Caltech Archive may or may not be able to give you such a license, because they may not know who owns the copyright. EdJohnston (talk) 17:43, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- Until this image is released under a free licence it is non-free and fails WP:NFCC#1. This seems like just the type of image that can be drawn anew, not a copy but a new image providing the same concept. Ask at the Commons Graphics Lab at c:Commons:Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop. ww2censor (talk) 18:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello Ed Johnston
Thank you for your reply. I'll contact Caltech Archives and see what their response to what you've written is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrandomcanuck (talk • contribs) 19:30, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Charles W. Phifer image
I had trouble uploading that image of Charles W. Phifer. I know where it's from--an 1854 pamphlet issued by the U. of North Carolina commemorating its graduation day. Which never was copyrighted, and is old enough to be in the public domain anyway. I filled out the upload form but it wouldn't allow me to upload it. Similar question with the image of Charles Dewitt Anderson I tried to upload. That's an image given to me by the family, of a photo taken in 1900. Somebody please let me know how to get these uploaded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballardice (talk • contribs) 22:27, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- This often happens the first time around. Better to upload this image to our sister project so that the image can be used by everyone. This is the link to Wikimedia Commons [2] . In the permissions box cut & past this : {{PD-US}} . Including the double parenthesis for and aft (these things... {{). This will identify the image as no longer in copyright. Add as much info about the image into the description as you can.--Aspro (talk) 22:54, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
These pics uploaded to Commons via Cross-Wiki are copyright infringement
these pictures are copyrighted, uploaed from Turkish media to digital camera, and reuploaded to Commmons. 1, 2, 3, 4 (62.205.74.95 (talk) 06:35, 26 March 2016 (UTC))
- The last three are now deleted, and the first one is also tagged for speedy deletion.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:05, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Not sure this is really fair-use
I came across this image File:Percy Jackson Portrait.jpg in the article Percy Jackson, and I have serious misgivings about whether it is suitable for use in Wikipedia. However, I'm not sure which of the 10 guidelines it violates, and so I'm not sure what to do about it. It seems like a "A publicity image", and it's certainly not required for use in the article (especially as it is appropriate to only one section of the page).
Should I remove it from the article? Are there any tags I should place on its file page, or specific warnings I should give to its uploader? Thanks in advance. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 18:17, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
- The only thing that image might violate is WP:NFCC#3 - identifying a fictional character in an article about that fictional character seems like it probably satisfies WP:NFCC#8.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:58, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Major Tom
I noticed that the Major Tom article didn't have an image, which seemed odd for such a recognisable pop-culture figure. However, it turns out that Bowie only actually portrayed the character in the original Space Oddity video, where he's always obscured by either a space helmet or a strange mirror-tunnel effect. (Additionally, the only copy online is quite blurry and seems to have been taken from a VHS.) I was thinking of adding an image I found online, which helpfully includes both Bowie's face and the "Major Tom" space suit (as well as the alien/angelic women discussed in the article), but it seems to be a fairly obscure behind-the-scenes photograph and I haven't been able to identify the copyright holder. Any ideas? —Flax5 21:29, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
- Mmm, seems like this is the sort of topic where no free image is likely to exist as it would be by default a derivative work. So use it as fair use?Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:33, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
- Is it a problem that we don't actually know who took the photo? —Flax5 16:41, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, because it makes it difficult/impossible to verify that it's a free image in case it actually is.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
- So which would be the better option, the photo or a still from the video? —Flax5 08:58, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, because it makes it difficult/impossible to verify that it's a free image in case it actually is.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
- Is it a problem that we don't actually know who took the photo? —Flax5 16:41, 27 March 2016 (UTC)