Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/Archive 9

Korean G-7

A brand new editor is at work on this page. I noticed the image was in Commons, and was surprised since the editor is so new, so I searched Google images and found it here. I don't know how to deal with these issues, but it appears to have been incorrectly added to Commons. I hope someone can take care of it. Sandy (Talk) 19:34, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, it has been tagged on commons now, possibly someone that speaks korean can make sure it's a copyvio, then it will be orphaned and deleted. - cohesion 20:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Creative Commons

I'd like to add an image on Flickr that I found here licensed under the Creative Commons 2.0 Attribution License. Is this the same as the 2.5 Attribution License, and what copyright information do I need to include in the image summary/license template? —ShadowHalo 01:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

It's not the same, but it is still ok for wikipedia. The correct tag is {{cc-by-2.0}}. You need to include the source, that tag, and attribution. Attribution is usually the flickr username, and a link back to the flickr page. Please include the source separately from the attribution (if you decide to do the attribution within the tag) Thanks! :D - cohesion 03:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

How do I find the copyright info?

Image:heralayout.gif and Image:heraruins.gif These two came from the same site. How do I find out about their copyright statuses? Can anyone else help me?

The credits page gives the info you need to start - contact the author of the web page to find out where she got the images from, and work your way back to find the actual author and see if they have released or will release them under a free license. --Davepape 19:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Concerning North Dakota articles

If your working group has any further issues with images on pages whose talk pages are tagged by WikiProject North Dakota, please issue a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject North Dakota. --AlexWCovington (talk) 07:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I can say I personally will probably be able to do this, but just so you know, the people that answer questions here, the people that tag different types of images, and the people who delete them are are somewhat, but not entirely overlapping groups. Some people tag only specific types of images also, so even thinking about people that tag images as a coherent group is not that true. Anyway, your best bet it to make the template really clear that you want to be contacted. - cohesion 21:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Professional Sports Players' Official Photos

I uploaded an image (Image:779.jpg), of a professional soccer/football player Gary Caldwell. I obtained this image from the official Celtic website, www.celticfc.net. I have no clue how to determine the copyright status of this image, but it seems logical that since I am promoting one of their players, posting his official photo on wikipedia seems like I can't possibly be doing something wrong. Is there a precedent for this or does anyone have any better ideas than emailing the organization and asking for permission? I don't want to have to send an email request for every player's picture I post...esp when they play for different teams. Please respond on my Talk Page, the Orphan Bot has already started a conversation there. Captkrob 00:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Replying on your talk page. Megapixie 01:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Default copyright status for screenshots of GPL software

If a screenshot is made of software that is licensed under the GNU General Public License, does it have some form of free license by default, or is it up to the author to choose one, as with other images? On a slight tangent (and one that might be obvious), the author is the person who took the screnshot, right? The initial question was triggered by this edit to Image:Dcplusplus hublist.png which changed the license to {{GPL}} with the edit summary "No, this is not copyrighted Windows. It's GPL!" --TheParanoidOne 10:32, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Screenshots of free softwear are likely GPL and long as they don't contian copywritten elements for non free programs. The author would be the author(s) of the software and would need to be credited under the GPL.Geni 10:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the default license, can you point me to where this is written down? I know you say that it's "likely" GPL, but I'd like to know the exact circumstances. --TheParanoidOne 21:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Public Domain

Image:PatrickTribett.jpg this image is of a government supplied mugshot, but it has been removed from the fark.com article by User:OrphanBot. should this not be covered under 'public domain' licensing? --emerson7 | Talk 18:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

No, not necessarily. Only federal, and some very few state, United States government works are automatically placed into the public domain. We would need to know what the copyright terms for the local agency responsible (presumably the police department) are. There's no reason to assume that this image is public domain. Jkelly 18:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

National treasures

what are national treasures —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.30.209.47 (talk • contribs) 2006 December 6 00:57 UTC

In what context? National treasure might be able to help you. ×Meegs 10:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair Use Criteria

Image:U2photo.jpg There is a free alternative on the Wikimedia Commons here, but it doesn't show as much detail when sized down. Does the existence of a free alternative mean that Image:U2photo.jpg doesn't meet the fair use criteria, and, if so, what should I do to have the image taken down since when I add the free alternative it gets reverted and an edit war is obviously not the solution? —ShadowHalo 14:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

It is necessary to make a judgement call in these cases. Here though, Image:U2AtMadisonSquare.jpg seems more than adequate, so the unfree image almost certainly does not meet fair use criterion #1. One of the many good things about the free image is that we can host the high resolution version and allow it to be clicked and viewed in detail apart from the article.

You're right, you should not edit war over the issue. You've done the right thing tagging the unfree image with {{replaceable fair use}}. What you need to do now is to invite the other editors to discuss the issue on the article or image's talk page. An administrator will come around after one week, read the discussion (if any), and decide whether or not to delete the image. ×Meegs 10:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your response! A similar situation has come up with Image:APA.JPG (with a free image here), but anonymous IP's have removed the tag without stating any reason twice so far. Does the tag have to remain on an image for a week, or will an admin still come so long as I restore the tag? And if it does need to stay on there for a week, is there anything that can be done to keep the tag until an admin reviews it? —ShadowHalo 06:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I now see that you're using the {{fair use disputed}} template; that won't necessarily guarantee that an administrator will consider its case anytime soon. I suggest using {{replaceable fair use}} for your purpose. It is the template that I was describing above that calls for people to comment on the image's talk page. It adds the image to a dated category in Category:Replaceable fair use images that administrators will process after a week or so. Use {{subst:rfu}} to automatically fill-in the template's date parameters with today's date. If the tag is improperly removed, you can restore it using its original date parameters, and ask that its removers comment on the talk page instead. ×Meegs 11:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, please consider using the two templates listed at the bottom of {{replaceable fair use}}, one for the article's caption and one to notify the uploader. ×Meegs 11:18, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks so much for your help. —ShadowHalo 23:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Jamie Spencer Image

I wrote the article on the jockey Jamie Spencer and had a look on flickr to see if I could find a relevant photo to add to the article. I found one and asked if we could use it, the photographer said we could provided he retained the copyright and was cited as the photographer in the article. I have uploaded the image here Image:JamieSpencerChampionJockey Caslad.jpg and as you can see it is up for speedy deletion. He has said he doesn't mind if people re-use the image for other purposes provided he retains copyright. Is that possible?--Wikipediatastic 16:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The goal of the project is to build a free content encyclopedia that is useable anywhere, by anyone, for any purpose. For this reason, with a few exceptions, images need to be available under a free license that allows anyone, not simply the Wikipedia website, to use them. There's a good deal of information about talking copyright holders on Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission and Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. From what you've said, I'd recommend that you ask them if they would be willing to release their photograph under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which straightforward and easy to understand. If they agree, the simplest solution is for them to change the license on the Flickr page. If they don't want to do that, you will need to forward a copy of your correspondence to the foundation as described in WP:ERP. The image will probably be deleted while you work on this, but do not be concerned; once the license is sorted-out, you can reupload the image. ×Meegs 16:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Well I have found a new image on flickr which we should be free to use, it is licensed under creative commons 2.0. When I load it up which of the things from the drop down do I use? I see there is one under dual licenses which mentions 2.0? --Wikipediatastic 13:40, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

That's great. A few things:

• There are lots of different Creative Commons licenses, and not all of them are compatible with Wikipedia (such as the ones that do not allow commercial use or derivative works).
• The one that you linked to, called "Attribution" or "cc-by", is compatible. Its copyright template is {{cc-by-2.0}}, and you need to make sure to list the photographer's name or attribute them in the manner that they've requested.
• It's best to upload freely licensed images to the Wikimedia Commons, where they can be used simultaneously by all of English Wikipedia's sister projects. As long as you upload it there under a filename that is not in use here on English Wikipedia, you will be able to use the image just as if you had uploaded it here.
• When you upload it to Commons, I suggest that you copy this format.

Don't hesitate to ask here if you need any more help. ×Meegs 14:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Laotian Rock Rat

I don't understand what should I do with this. The source is there and the professor released the image to the public.

alfiboy 05:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

"Released to the public" can have many meanings. Simply publishing a work or posting it on a web site does not cause it to enter the public domain and does not automatically authorize others to reuse it. If this photo's copyright is held by the AP, then we can only use it on Wikipedia if it meets our fair use policy. I see that you've already discovered the conversation taking place on the image's talk page about whether the photo meets criterion #1 for fair use. ×Meegs 13:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Images fromYahoo! Sports

How do we put copyright tags for images from Yahoo! Sports? example: Image:Park_Tae-Hwan_1500free06ASiadsolo.jpg. Aeron Valderrama 07:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

This image could not be used to depict Park Tae-Hwan. Please see WP:FU. We may only use freely-licensed images to depict living people. In general, we are free to use getty images or wireimage images only if you provide evidence that you have paid them so the image may be used on the Wikipedia. They are a commercial provider of images and it is a direct violation of copyright to use their images without paying. --Yamla 15:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

the photo I uploaded does not appear at the page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul#Places_of_interest

just added a tarabya photo here on that above link. please explain me why it doesnt appear on the page

emre

I don't know what the problem was exactly, but I've fixed it. You had used Image:Tarabya1.JPG?, and I changed it to Image:Tarabya1.JPG. Don't ask me what the difference is. ×Meegs 01:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like you'd placed an invisible character after the JPG. ×Meegs 01:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

i am the copyright holder, but image gets tagged for deletion.

Image:OldJM450.jpg

This image is tagged for deletion due to "improper copyright tag."

I am the copyright holder, and give permission to publish this photo. How do I fix this?

Fredcom 20:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Alex, fredericksburg.com

If you are the copyright holder you need to include the source and the license for the image. All images on wikipedia must be licensed under a free license according to Wikipedia:Image use policy. Please follow the instructions on the upload page to add the required information. Also, per the image use policy, "user-created images may not be watermarked, distorted, have any credits in the image itself or anything else that would hamper their free use", which may be a problem for this image. If you have any questions let us know. - cohesion 19:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:NickBergandFiveMen.JPG

This image taken from the video of Nick Berg's execution is used to illustrate this sunject on his article. It has been tagged as fair use replaceable and some discussion has resulted on the talk page. It seems that this precisely the sort of image a fair use claim is appropriate for, the tagger disagrees. Imput from third parties would be helpful in resolving the matter. -WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 18:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Responded - cohesion 19:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

help for image the nun --Ali 12:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

please just help me , i dont know what must do with this image and what is it's licence. I have scanned the image from the movie cover , and then i have edited it in photoshop and uploaded it , that is all i know. Image:The_nun.jpg --Ali 12:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like you figured it out. ×Meegs 09:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Army Corps of Engineers logo

I have a question about the copyright/tagging of Image:911th Patch.JPG. Currently there is a {logo} tag on it. However, it being a military logo I don't think it applies since it falls under public domain, doesn't it? But the tag {PD-USGov-Military-Army-USACE} doesn't seem to be appropriate given the wording in its tag, either. So how do we classify this image? --ScreaminEagle 13:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

From Work of the United States Government: "Certain works, particularly logos of government agencies, while not copyrightable, are still protected by other laws similar in effect to trademark laws, protecting indicators of source or quality." Leave the fair use template. ×Meegs 09:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Choice of English licence tag for private family photos

Hi - I am English and have recently contibuted the biographical article on Clare Heald, the English horsewoman. I now want to upload an image of her (or two eventually!), and I own the photograph(s) of her I want to upload - I am a relation. Both photographs were both taken over 70 years ago by people who died 50 years or more ago, one of them, taken by her husband, and the other probably by a local professional photographer. Both photos are private family photographs. Ideally, I wish to retain copyright of them, but would like to offer them for use but only with my prior permission. Please help me with a choice of licence tag ..! Also, tell me if this kind of copyright is a practical option on Wikipedia? Any guidance welcome and much appreciated. Please leave a message on my talk page. Many thanks. Plowdenc 14:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, we cannot accept media that is licensed "with permission only". Jkelly 19:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot contacted me

I received an automated message from OrphanBot regarding Image:GerdaBoyesenSW.jpg which I uploaded saying I haven't provided a fair use rationale. Howevere, I believe I have, so what's the problem? Is it me or the bot? __meco 16:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

That's not much of a rationale, and I think that image should be deleted, but the version that OrphanBot tagged had no rationale whatsoever. You added it six minutes after OrphanBot tagged it -- check the history. OrphanBot wouldn't have tagged the current version. Jkelly 19:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

about image:cfweapons.png

I'm new to Wikipedia, and I have written an article of Chaos Faction the online game, and uploaded an image. I need help choosing an appropriate copyright tag. The image was created by me playing Chaos Faction, and then taking a screenshot of myself playing. I do not know whether this would be considered an image I made myself, or an image that the producers of the game have rights with. Thanks.

--Wikimasa 00:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

The correct tag to use is {{videogame-screenshot}}. --BigDT 17:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

?? How do i get one, what are they ??

I have an image and I dont know the copyright tags, can you tell me them?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmputer (talk • contribs)

• In general, the creator of the image owns the copyright. Keep in mind that merely modifying someone else's work does not give you rights to it (see Commons:Commons:derivative works) - the person who originally created the work owns the copyright. If this is an image that you created from scratch (not a screenshot, not a copy/paste of someone else's work), then you can tag it with any "free" copyright tag like {{PD-self}} or {{GFDL-self}}. If someone else owns this work and they have not released it under a "free" license, then it can only be used if it meets Wikipedia's "fair use" policy (see WP:FAIR). What kind of image is it that you are talking about and who created it? BigDT 17:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Never mind ... I see ... Image:RCT3 park2.JPG. The correct tag to use there is {{videogame-screenshot}}. --BigDT 17:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

My picture is fair use

I don't understand how my picture is not fair use. It is from the show's offical website, and on their promotional picture page. I stated that and cited it with the link. Image:Collins-Paige.jpg How is this not fair use? Brainboy109 December 17, 2006 0:57 (UTC)

Who owns the copyright, and how do we know? How is this image irreplaceable? Is the image intended to be used commercially? Please see Wikipedia:Fair use criteria for what is necessary for a Wikipedia:Fair use claim. Jkelly 06:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

about uploading of images

dear sir,

i want to know what type of images are accepted on wikipedia? are images saved from google earth are valid? i want to upload my school's picture taken by my mobile phone. is it valid?

reply

If you have taken a photo yourself then it is valid as long as you release it under a free-license, such as the GFDL license or a suitably free Creative Commons license (the non-commercial and non-derivatives combos are not usable). Images from Google Earth on the other hand is not suitable. Most of the images it users are copyrighted and not usable under terms compatable with Wikipedia. --Sherool (talk) 20:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Cheeky image

I was trying to put an image Image:Mr._Cheeky.jpg on my user page to check its quality. The image is bad and therefore I would like to delete it but I do not know how to do this. Can you help? Libro0 01:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

It's likely to get deleted on it's own looking at the state of the image. I have to point out that fair use images are not allowed on user pages per policy WP:Fair use. Megapixie 05:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Fairchild image

Someone is going to have to explain the concept of "freely licensed image could reasonably be found" to me, because the image in question is of a device that is about 30 years old and is unlikely to exist in complete form any more. Maury 15:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Could you provide a link to the image in question. Thanks. Megapixie 05:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

From the warning at his talk page, it would be Image:Fairchild channel-f.gif. —ShadowHalo 06:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this is the correct image. I thought I was replying on the original poster's page, but apparently it redirected here. So, what to do? Maury 22:09, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Did I do the right thing?

I tagged the image Meemee.jpg as having no fair use rationale (seeing it's used under the {{fairusein}} template, and was uploaded after May 4, 2006). Did I do the right thing? I just want to make sure. --AAA! ^{(AAAA • AAAAAAAA)} 05:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

You've alerted the uploader. The only extra thing to do would be to add the notice from the template to the image captions. Alternatively you could provide a rationale for the image. Megapixie 05:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm no good at rationales. But I've now added a notice to the image captions (at least the ones that have a caption). --AAA! ^{(AAAA • AAAAAAAA)} 05:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Hamed2.jpg

Image:Hamed2.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamid ekb (talk • contribs)

What is your question about the image? --BigDT 11:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

The Simpsons Archive

I asked a question at AfD, but perhaps the question can be answered here. Sandy (Talk) 18:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

If I understand it, it is not our article that infringes on copyright, but instead the concern is that we have an article about a copyright infringing website? I'm not sure that's a compelling reason to delete -- I don't imagine we'll be deleting Youtube, for instance. That said, I would take the article to WP:AFD regardless, because these seems to be an article about a random forum or newsgroup, and probably fails WP:WEB, the relevant inclusion guideline. Jkelly 18:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Jkelly. I guess my other question is, even if the article meets notability, WP:EL says we can't link to its site anyway, because we can't link to sites that violate copyright? Sandy (Talk) 18:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

My personal opinion is that if we're going to have an article about this web group, it would be weird not to link to them (see Youtube again), but shouldn't link to them anywhere else. That said, I do think the article should just be deleted, solving this particular problem. Jkelly 21:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's getting hammered at AfD - so much for my first try at AfD  :-) Sandy (Talk) 21:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps I should have warned you that anything involving The Simpsons, Star Trek, or Pokemon is immune to our content policies. Jkelly 21:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I should have guessed :-) Sandy (Talk) 22:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Rank insignia of the Galactic Empire#Original research and conjecture

Please take a look at the table of Star Wars ranks. They are marked with an assortment of copyright tags - some as logos, others as video game screenshots, at least one as PD-self. As of right now, they are only used on this particular talk page, so something has to be done one way or another - non-free images cannot be used outside of article space. My current thinking is that, as they are simple shapes, they could be considered {{PD-ineligible}} and free. Any thoughts? BigDT 21:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Help please: What's the right tag?

Hello,

I'm a little confused as to the correct copyright tag to use for an image. I did not create it myself, but it was created for me and my organization is the copyright holder. If I use "GFDL-self", it says I created it, which is false. Is there an appropriate tag for "While I am not the creator, I am the copyright owner and hereby grant permission for its use here"?

The image in question is Image:CALogo.png and I've used "GFDL-self" for now, but would rather not take false credit for the creator's work if I can avoid it.

Thanks, --guru 20:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure you wish to release your logo under a free lisence?Geni 20:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm... I thought I did, but your question makes me wonder if maybe I misunderstand the implications of doing this. :)

What I want to do is give permission for its use on Wikipedia on any articles discussing the event that the logo is for. Is there an appropriate tag which indicates this permission is given by the copyright owner who is not the creator?

Thanks!

--guru 21:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

We do not allow the use of content under permission that is limited to Wikipedia. What I recommend is that you remove the {{GFDL-self}} template and replace it with {{logo}}. If you do that, you will retain all of the image's rights, but fair use will still allow us to use it in articles that are about the event. ×Meegs 21:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! --guru 22:01, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Publicity Stills

I have access to two different publicity stills, both dating from circa 1943.

One of them is specifically identified as having been put out by Blue Network Company, Inc., the corporate predecessor of ABC. The still was issued to advertise a radio program. The second still was also put out to advertise a radio program, and while it is possible that the same firm also issued this one, the text on the back of the photograph is "unsigned."

I want to use these stills, two illustrate two programs that the Blue Network was broadcasting in 1943.

What would be the proper tagging for these photographs, both as a matter of theory and in the technical coding? Can it be argued that these are fair use?

In addition, I have an image that is a picture of a matchbook cover that is in my collection. The physical object is in my collection; the scan of the item was taken by the eBay seller who sold it to me, and he has indicated he has no problem with my use of the scan.

Again, what is the best way to tag this item?

Please respond on my talk page, if you can. Thank you very much for any help you can give.

Eric O. Costello 01:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Sound files

I wanted to get a second opinion on this since it's obviously best to be on the safe side when it comes to fair use. I'd like to add a sample of a song to an article about the album. The article discusses the style of the album both lyrically and musically, but it doesn't discuss the song itself. Adding a sample of the song to illustrate the lyrical and musical content would still meet fair use, right? —ShadowHalo 05:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

In princple - yes. If you can be more specific about which article it might be helpful. See Madonna (entertainer) and Image:LikeAPrayerSample.ogg. Note that the quantity of material used should be as minimal as possible. Megapixie 08:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The article is Return of Saturn. I added a 15-second song sample of "Six Feet Under", which isn't discussed in the article and is otherwise non-notable, since it's the most direct in its lyrical content, which is very helpful when it's only a 15-30 clip. —ShadowHalo 21:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

2 images I uploaded

I have uploaded 2 images for Bloodrayne, which are Image:Beliar.jpg Image:Daemites.jpg seen on the right. A bot has said that " there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use."

These images are seen in the offical Bloodrayne guide, as I have the guide with me right now. These pictures are not seen in the game, but appear to look as if the characters from the game are positioned for the guide character section. I'm no game designer expert so I cant be for sure. So, because of this, I dont know which copyright tag to use. cesarb told me to use the "fair use" tag, so I used it.

Why were these 2 images tagged as appearently " there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use." I don't understand this. "THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!" 05:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

On wikipedia we are only allowed to use non-GFDL/public domain media under certain circumstances - one of these is under the Wikipedia fair use policy. Part of the policy is a requirement for a rationale: a block of text that explains why the use of the image is essential, and that it doesn't infringe on the rights of the copyright holder. See Image:WW2_Iwo_Jima_flag_raising.jpg for an example of fair use claims. The fact that the images are from a game guide - and you are using the images in an article about the game actually makes the fair use claim a bit difficult, since it could be argued that you are providing an alternative to the copyright holders original product. Megapixie 06:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm fairly new to uploading images, so I'll mostlikely ask more questions....So whats the block text and what am I supposed to write in it?..........................Would just be better off getting a screenshot of the game instead?? "THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!" 22:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Screenshots directly captured from the game would be preferable - since you are not providing an alternative to the game. You can then use the {{game-screenshot}} tag. You still need to provide a rationale however. Megapixie 13:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Question on two images I uploaded

I recently uploaded pictures of Cam Jackson (Image:Camjackson.jpg) and Mike Wallace (politician) (Image:WallaceMike CPC.jpg) for their respective profiles, and I tagged them, yet I still got warnings about those images. What have I done wrong? Please respond on my talk page. --James Duggan 06:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Copyrighted images being used under fair use should have a rationale as to how they meet the fair use criteria for Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Image_description_page#Fair_use_rationale). One of these criteria which especially applies to images of living people is that it would not be possible to create a free image. This is the case for most public figures, however there are exceptions, for example, when people are noted for being very reclusive (e.g. J. D. Salinger) or when the image is being used to show the person at a past event being discussed in the article (e.g. U2#All That You Can't Leave Behind and Elevation Tour (2000–2002)) or how they appeared at a given point in time (e.g. "Weird Al" Yankovic#New look to present). —ShadowHalo 00:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

What tag do I use

I am having some problems with getting the right template with my image. I have written permission from the artists of the images and I forwarded the emails to Wikipedia as I read I should do. However, what tag should I use for images that are copyrighted, yet have permission to be used on Wikipedia by their copyright holder?

please can you let me know on my talk page, cheers.

--Adamwilcox 20:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Replied at talk page. —ShadowHalo 21:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for PDF file?

Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia and I was just trying to upload a pdf file as a reference source, and it seems to be reading it as an image file and asking for an image tag. I'm not sure what to do. I have written who the copyright belongs to and who the author of the document is. What else should I do? Thanks... I look forward to your wisdom! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amasintay (talk • contribs) 12:13, 21 December 2006

Well all files are stored in the Image: namespace, since that's what it's mostly used for. The same rules apply for all files though, you need a suitable copyright tag for it. For future reference please do not upload PDF's, DOC's etc found on the web just to reference them, just link directly to the document on the source website. This one is not freely licensed (copyrighted by the UN), and there is rely no way we can justify copying a full 92 page document in it's entierty under "fair use" so I have deleted it. --Sherool (talk) 12:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Movie poster

Ho can I put a tag with an image I know can be admitted with the fair use rationale(movie poster, I know producer and the author of the poster) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreanrc (talk • contribs) 14:23, 21 December 2006

If you have already uploaded it go to the image page, hit "edit this page" and add the information about author and producer and fair use rationale and add {{movieposter}} for the movie poster copyright tag template itself. If you have not yet uploaded the image simply pick "Movie poster" from the licensing drop down list and write the author and publisher info and the rationale in the textarea. --Sherool (talk) 21:27, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Flag Madness

I am trying to fill out the Gallery of Confusable Flags. The image of one flag, that of the Comoros from 1975-1978, is not available in the Commons but is available on a website. This does not say the image is copyrighted, but does say that any copyrighted material on the site can be used (cue scary music) for non-commercial and non-political purposes. Foolish me, I uploaded it and now feel like a very evil man.

Now, it's a flag. Based on the general idea of it, I made my own version using Powerpoint autoshapes in about five minutes, but I don't know whether or not the design of the flag is copyrighted by some Comoran septuagenarian socialist or (even more ironically) by a soft drink company or something. Now, it could be said that I "made" this image, but I understand there are special legal rules regarding flag images, and I want my wiki experience to be an entirely legal one.

Is there any advice you can give me to help me out?

v/r, Hammon27 20:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I take it you mean Image:VMorleyComoros1975.gif? There's a legal theory that any faithful reproduction of a non-copyrighted image (such as historical national flags generally are) is itself uncopyrightable under US law, but it's better to make a new image that's incontrovertably free. If you're unsatisfied with your own effort (which you could have released under any license you like, since its your own work) then I suggest you drop a line to flag expert Zscout370 on his talk page and see if he has the time to help you out. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. The one currently up in the Gallery is the one I made, and as soon as I make sure that the flag design isn't copyrighted I'll put up a license. I think my Autoshape should be fine for the purposes of the gallery. And thanks for pointing me towards Zscout370 v/r, Hammon27 05:34, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Having looked into this a little further, it appear that the design of national flags are not copyrightable, but individual depictions of them are. You can apply a free license your own image as you like. You might also want to coordinate with WikiProject Flags at The Commons, especially if you plan to do extensive work on flags. Several flags of the Comoros are already present there, although not this one that I could find. You should, in any event, add the {{insignia}} template to the image description page in addition to the license tag. TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:17, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Questions about images I added to ActionCube

The ActionCube article that I created, and most of the images such as Image:Flag_cla.jpg are from the documentation files of the video game. Can anyone tell me what license these would be under?Cuberguy 23:26, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

These are copyrighted works can can only be used here under fair use. The appropriate tag would be {{fair use in}}, with the name of the article for which fair use of the image is claimed as a parameter. (ActionCube in this case.) See WP:FAIR and Help:Image page#Fair use rationale for guidance. The tag is not a substitute for valid rationale which you must supply. TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Possibly plagiarised Images

The uploader of this list of images claimed he created them himself, but they all look like they've been borrowed from the internet, and I've listed some of the images at Possibly Unfree Images. Can someone look into this for the others? If I list them all at PUI I'm afraid of clogging up the page. --AAA! ^{(AAAA • AAAAAAAA)} 08:34, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Since quite a number of the images are clearly taken from web sites and magazines, and since the volume is so high, I've gone ahead and struck the {{GFDL-self}} and {{PD-self}} tags of the 39 images that you hadn't already listed elsewhere and left the user a message. Your're right, whether they did this on purpose or without knowing better, we really can't trust any of their tags. If you could, please add some of the images to your watchlist and monitor the changes. It may be the case that a small subset of those images are actually their own, and they may need our help working things out. ×Meegs 05:33, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. --AAA! ^{(AAAA • AAAAAAAA)} 05:43, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

How do I sort out the copyright for my ugg boot image, so it won't get deleted?

Image:Classic_ugg_boot.jpg I emailed the owners of the site http://www.uggs-n-rugs.com.au/lo-boot.html which is where the image came from. They okayed the image for use in Wikipedia by return email.

So how do I sort out its copyright, so it can be used and not automatically deleted from the entry on Ugg Boots? I am tempted to re-insert the image everytime it gets deleted, but I am certain that I would get banned.

If it is deleted, then an image that prominantly shows the Decker's UGG brand is quick to replace it, and it is not a page on Decker's Ugg brand, it is about all ugg boots, which is why I chose that image specifically - as well as showing one with the cuff folded down. Could you please help me sort this matter out, as I wish to keep this page about all ugg boots, not just Decker's?

--D f cornish 05:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we do not allow the use of images when their copyright holder has merely granted permission for Wikipedia to use them. We are a free content project and, with a few exceptions, all of our content needs to be available under a free license such as the GFDL or the Creative Commons Attribution License. There are two solutions. One is to take your own photograph and release it under a free license. The second is to ask that image's owners to release their photo under a free license (which would allow anyone to use it for any purpose, including commercial ones). There's a lot of information about this option at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission and Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. Taking your own picture, though, is obviously much simpler if you have access to a pair of the boots. ×Meegs 05:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

How to create a copyright

I hade created pictures myself - i own them, but i do not have any license for them nor hold any copyright - how is a copyright made?? is there any thing else that i can use to prove that i created those pictures? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrizwank (talk • contribs) 2006 December 23 08:30 UTC.

You do have to produce one. When uploading, there are a couple of choices you can make, the most obvious one being simple Public domain. MadMaxDog 08:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

It varies depending on where you are, but for the most part, you are automatically granted copyright protection any time you commit a creative work to material form. If you want to contribute your work to Wikipedia, you have to give up some of those rights by licensing your image (or releasing it completely into the public domain). When you upload your image to Wikipedia (or better yet, Wikimedia Commons), you are asked to select an compatible license. Two good options for images on Wikipedia are the GNU Free Document License and the Creative Commons Attribution License. Be aware that both of these licenses allow anyone — not just Wikipedia — to use your photos for any purpose, and that they are irrevocable. When you upload an image, also try to give as much information as you can about it (Who took the photo? Where? When? What is the subject? Has the photo been published elsewhere?) to avoid any confusion. If you have any more questions, fire away. ×Meegs 08:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

For image descriptions, use the example found in [1] under 'Good file descriptions'. I Don't understand why this is not automatically provided for in the upload form anyway. Oh well, I guess programmers have lives too ;-) MadMaxDog 10:29, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Can't edit my image???!???

After uploading Image:OvergrownSpaHellBourg.jpg, I got a notice from Orphanbot telling me that it had no image licensing tag. Right he was - it didn't. Can't understand why it ended up without one, should have been 'self2|GFDL|cc-by-2.5'. But in an even more weird twist, I cannot EDIT either the copyright info or the image description!!!

Very weird bug here. Any help? MadMaxDog 03:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry. I've taken care of it. --AAA! ^{(AAAA • AAAAAAAA)} 03:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

As I said on your user page - thanks, but I still cannot edit it, even if the most immediate problem is fixed. Wonder if re-upping it would do that... MadMaxDog 05:09, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Try logging out and editing the image as an IP. That might work. --AAA! ^{(AAAA • AAAAAAAA)} 05:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Neither logging out nor re-upping has worked. It seems as if it is in some way edit-protected for non-admins? Can I delete it someway (if you can, please do) and try again? MadMaxDog 06:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Can one of the admins please delete this picture? I have uploaded another copy under a different name. MadMaxDog 08:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. Thanks contributing these great photos. For the future, please consider creating an account at the Wikimedia Commons and uploading your free pictures there instead of here. Images on Commons can be used simultaneously by English Wikipedia and all of our sister projects. As long as you choose a filename on Commons that is not in use on here on Wikipedia, you will be able to use the file just as if you had uploaded it locally. For example, commons:Image:Leonardo da Vinci parachute 04659a.jpg is an image that was uploaded only to Commons, but it is used in our article Parachute, as well as in Turkish Wikipedia at tr:Parasüt. ×Meegs 00:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I am thinking of both transferring the images to Commons, as well as (possibly, not sure yet) making them Public Domain at some stage. However, as to the first, I am still hoping for an eventual unified login across Wikimedia. MadMaxDog 03:30, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:ATHFCharacters.png

As I mentioned on the talk page, I didn't know what to put as a copyright when I uploaded it, but I believe it is considered to fall under WP:FU as promotional artwork of the Aqua Teen Hunger Force characters. Don't know which specific tag to add onto the image though. --ZJH 06:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

If you think the image complies with Wikipedia's fair use policy, then the template to use is {{Non-free fair use in|name of article}}. Make sure that you provide a rationale on the image description page that addresses each of our fair use criteria (#2,3,8,9,10 are most relevant here). Also be sure to identify the image's copyright holder (the animator and/or the production company) and the place the image was published.

Also, I notice that the image currently appears only in User:ZJH/ATHF Draft, which you copied from Aqua Teen Hunger Force yesterday. Be very careful when working on forks of articles like this. If you are planning to paste your changes back into the main article, be aware that this would obliterate all of the contributions that other people have made since you first copied the page. I strongly advise that you work on the main article in-place. ×Meegs 09:16, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The picture can just be deleted. I may re-upload at another time, but now I know which copyright to use for it. --ZJH 21:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Flow of political parties in Iran

I created a picture of the flow of political parties in Iran in 23 December and I changed it in 25 December because of a mistake but I don't understand how to change it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WikipediaIRAN (talk • contribs) 2006 December 26 13:49 UTC.

Image:LINKS.JPG? The second version that you uploaded has overwritten the first; if you are still seeing the old one, you may need to empty your web browser's cache. What the image is missing, though, is information about its copyright. Are you willing to release the chart under the GNU Free Document License? If so, edit the image description page and replace the template that is there with this one: {{GFDL-self}}. While you're there, could you also add a one sentence description of the chart? Let us know if you need any more help. ×Meegs 14:04, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Photo of an image?

It seems to me that taking a photo of someone else's image bestows no rights on the photographer. So it would seem to me that Image:Stanthonyrecession.jpg is mislicensed. Since it is originally a PD US Army Corps of Engineers image, it doesn't need to be deleted, just retagged. --J Clear 22:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you are absolutely correct. If you have information about the original document's source, please add it to the description page and change the copyright tag appropriately. Also consider dropping the uploader a message about the issue. ×Meegs 12:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I have updated the tag on the image, and done a little photoshop magic to make it more diagram like. Should be fine now. Megapixie 12:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:John Travolta 2004.jpg

This is a cropped image of John Travolta. He is standing with Tracey Hunter in the original photo. However, the image description lists her as the "Author". I'm told here, that she handed the camera to somebody to take the photo. So, we have three people with potential "rights":

• John Travolta, for being the only remaining subject in the uncropped photo
• Tracey Hunter, for owning the camera, and directing its useage (not yet stated on the image description page)
• The anonymous photographer, for being the actual author of the work

IANL, but IMO Hunter has the least rights, of all three people. I don't see how owning a camera gives one rights. I think the photographer owns the copyright. I've been told I'm being "loopy" for questioning the matter, so sorry in advance for the "loopy" question: Who owns the copyright? --Rob 05:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that this image is on Commons, so this question probably should be posed there rather than here. IANAL either, but I would agree with you ... it seems that the anonymous author owns rights to the photo. We kinda look the other way on that a lot of times though ... how many Wikipedians have pictures of themselves on their user pages that are tagged as PD-self or GFDL-self? I don't know that it's right or wrong, but we treat those pictures almost like work products. If you create a work (photo, software, whatever) for your employer, he/she owns it, not you. I wonder if there has ever been any caselaw on this ... BigDT 05:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

personal

the picture i loaded is a personal picture for my father. there are no copy rights. how do i tag it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dakhilaf (talk • contribs).

If there is no copyright - then I would suggest tagging it with {{norightsreserved}} or {{pd-user}}. However could you explain a bit more about the source of the image (who was the photographer, etc.) p.s. you can sign your name by typing ~~~~ Megapixie 08:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Copyright status of facsimile of 1681 text?

I'm wondering if it's ok to add images from a facsimile of an edition from an old text from 1681. Would I have to contact the company that produced the facsimile in order to use the image I scanned? Or does it fall into free licensing or fair use? In other words, it's their copy of the author's text but do they have the copyright on their copy?

Bewtros 06:00, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

If the actual document itself dates from 1681 (i.e. it was physically created in 1681) - and the image in question is an exact reproduction of the physical form of the document (i.e. not digitally cleaned up, etc) then it is okay to use per Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. as the document will have lapsed into the public domain.

However if this is a recent edition of the document (i.e. it is physically a reprint from later than 1850) then that may not be the case. A little more information about the specifics would be helpful. Megapixie 06:18, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

The edition from which I've taken the scan is from 1980, thus my worries about copyright issues since they could very well say that they have cleaned up the text, collated it with other versions, etc. I've seen the original text and the facsimile is actually much better not only because of time but since the old copies are almost never complete (some pages burned, withered, eaten by worms, etc.). Should I post w/ some fair use rationale or should I ask for permissions from the company? There are also some copies of the original 1681 text on two websites--would it be easier/better to request permission from those pages' owners? (Actually just one, someone grabbed the images for her blog and the other is the museum I link to in my article). Bewtros 20:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I forgot to add that the facsimile was printed in Barcelona, Spain so this may or may not have any bearing but thought I would add it just in case. Bewtros 20:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Forgot an image

Image:Meemee.jpg has been tagged with no rationale since 18 December 2006. I think the tag is well past its use-by date. --AAA! ^{(AAAA • AAAAAAAA)} 09:11, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you for tagging it. It has now been deleted by User:Jkelly (See [2]). FYI, unless there is a question as to whether its use is appropriate or whether there is a potential rationale for use that has been missed, you don't need to post the question here - just tagging it with an appropriate speedy deletion tag is sufficient. BigDT 00:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Questions about permission

I have permission from the copyright holder to use his pictures on wikipedia. Do I need to submit something in writing or use a different format when I upload these files? Thanks in advance.--Mike Searson 20:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. This page gives you a sample letter of permission and describes the process in detail. The short version of it is to make sure that they understand that they need to release it under a "free" license (allowing anyone to use it for any reason), as opposed to merely allowing Wikipedia (and nobody else) to use it. Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission fully describes the process. BigDT 00:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

taggaing images

I want to upload the shoaib akhtar image.which is from the site cricinfo.com.what is the tagging of the iamge so i can not get deletion note.please tell me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Malikkhan (talk • contribs) 05:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

If you're referring to this image, it appears that {{promophoto}} would be the appropriate tag. In order for the image to not be tagged for deletion, also make sure to include a fair use rationale that describes why the image meets Wikipedia's fair use criteria. Since it appears to be an image of a living person, especially make sure that the image meets the first criterion. —ShadowHalo 05:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Help with image

Hello, I'm sort of new to Wikipedia, and I have written an article of OptiVISOR (the magnification precision device), and uploaded an image. I need help choosing an appropriate copyright tag. The image was created by me after taking the photo on my desk and making the background transparent in Photoshop. I do not know whether this would be considered an image I made myself, or an image that the manufacturers or creators of the device have rights with. Thank you.

--Extranet 00:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Accoring to the summeries on all the images you have uploaded they all came from various websites rather than you takeing them yourself.Geni 02:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

By "taking the photo on my desk", I think he means he downloaded the image to his computer's desktop.

No, the edited version's copyright is the same as the original photo's. You will either need to take a photo of an OptiVISOR yourself, or ask the image's owners to release their photo under a free license (which would allow anyone to use it for any purpose, including commercial ones). There's a lot of information about the second option at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission and Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. Taking your own picture, though, is obviously much simpler if you have access one of these devices. ×Meegs 02:27, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot has now asked me to remove two of my images (including Optivisor.gif). Can I please simply get both images (Optivisor.gif and LittleBirdy.gif) deleted? It was my mistake to upload them, and might consider reading up on the 'copyright' requesting section. Thank you. --Extranet 21:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello, sorry to bother the admins once again, but OrphanBot has asked me to update one of my previously uploaded images (Image:StephanieMcintosh_Lrg.jpg). Can I also get this deleted please? Thanks, Extranet ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 03:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. Also, if you ever need to delete an image, you can just add the tag {{db-author}} to it and someone will come along shortly :) - cohesion 04:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that! --Extranet ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 05:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Which tag should I use?

Okay, so I have 1 picture up of Reggie Bush. The photographer (anonymous) put the picture up for anybody to use, without saying that nobody could use it. It was from a fansite of Reggie Bush (and was also printed in our newspaper after it was put on the site)-- are those pictures allowed to be used? There was no picture with the rather long article (to me, at least), and I thought it could be put. After I received a message from OrphanBot, I realized I didn't know what tag to put on it. There's no copyright on it, and from a fansite.

Can I have some help? Or.. if not, is it eligible to be used?

Sargun

Can you provide a link to the fansite in question? The image in question Image:Reggie-bush-atmillsapscollege-training-camp.jpg has an exif that includes: "Rookie Mini Camp at the New Orleans Saints Facility in Metairie, Louisiana on May 14, 2006 All Images Copyright Michael C. Hebert ". We would need to establish that the image actually came from the website of Michael C. Hebert, and that he had actually granted permission.

If that is the case then it {{No rights reserved}} would be the right template. p.s. you can sign your name by typing ~~~~ Megapixie 07:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

It was a fansite that just had a bunch of pictures of Reggie Bush.. Here: http://www.reggiebush25.com/reggie-bush-pics.html . Looked like a normal fansite, and there was a link to an online store for sports merchandise. And, just a question, what's an exif? Sargun 22:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

An EXIF is a metadata tag inside a JPG file. If a file has an EXIF it is displayed at the bottom of the image description page in wikipedia. Looking at the website in question - it's almost certainly a copyright violation. One of the images on the front page is stamped with Getty images. The image is almost certainly unsuitable for use on wikipedia as a result (see the warning posted on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload "Do not upload images found on websites or image search engines, as they will be deleted.". I'm afraid the image will have to be deleted). For more information see Wikipedia:Copyrights#Using_copyrighted_work_from_others Megapixie 23:10, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Lifecert.jpg

I am replying to a note I received from wikipedia asking for the source of image:Lifecert.jpg. This is an image of our PI GAMMA MU membership certificate

The source of this image is our PI GAMMA MU honor society. The website is www.pigammamu.org The contact person there is Sue Watter,s who knows me personally as I am a life member of Pi Gamma Mu.

Please delete the note about the source of the above-referenced image and please let me know that you received this reply. Thank you.

Profdrmendoza 00:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Images need both a source and license on the image description page. The source would be something like, yourself, or their webpage. This is where you got the image. You would need to mention the person or entity that actually created the photo, as well as who has copyright of it. In addition to that you need to select the correct license from Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. If you have any other questions let us know. - cohesion 03:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

cinera.jpg

I am replying to a note I received from wikipedia asking for the source of Image:cinera.jpg. This is an image of our PI GAMMA MU honor society.

The source of this image is our PI GAMMA MU honor society chapter at Texas A & M University. The website is stuact.tamu.edu/stuorgs/pgm/history.html I am a life member of Pi Gamma Mu.

Please delete the note about the source of the above-referenced image and please let me know that you received this reply. Thank you.

Profdrmendoza 01:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

This warning is like above, but only stating that you need a copyright tag, which can be selected from Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. The tag you select should be the license that is correct though, you cannot relicense the image if you are not the copyright holder. - cohesion 03:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no copyright information for this image and I would go for the fair use policy that you describe. The website where this image came from is our Pi Gamma Mu chapter at Texas A & M University. The website address is: stuact.tamu.edu/stuorgs/pgm/images/cineraria.jpg

Copyright holder

I'm not quite sure who the copyright holder of an image is. I took a picture of my school while I was the school's webmaster and published the image at the school's website, where there was/is a notice at the bottom saying "© 2006 Hereford High School". Since I've graduated, I'm no longer the webmaster there. Who holds the copyright? Me, the school, or the school system? And if it's not me, who would I have to contact to release the image (or would it just be better to get a friend to take a new picture)? —ShadowHalo 06:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

You. Jkelly 06:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Note that if you were an actual school employee as webmaster (as opposed to volunteer or freelancer), then it may be a work for hire and be owned by the school (in which case, taking a new picture would be better). --Davepape 15:19, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I was not an employee, so I went ahead and uploaded the image. —ShadowHalo 22:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Ostermann EA.jpg

Hi all: Orphan bot has tagged this image as lacking a copyright provence. I don't think this is quite correct, but correct me if I am wrong.

I think I am correct for several reasons

1) The picture is taken from [3] which an official website owned by the United States Taxpayer and operated by the United States Marine Corps.

2) It is an official service portrait, taken by a photographer who was probably either a civillian employee or an enlisted photographer for either the Marines or the Navy

The questions is: Ought I remove or allow to be removed this file that I have uploaded? Cheers V. Joe 08:20, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

No, it is fine, but in the future just add the source to the image description page. I have done it already for this one :) Thanks for looking into it more rather than have it deleted :D - cohesion 12:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)