Image talk:Cowrapowcamp.jpg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I suggest that the copyright text on this image (and others like it) be changed to:

This image was created in Australia and is now in the public domain because its term of copyright has expired. According to the Australian Copyright Council (ACC), ACC Information Sheet G23 (Duration of copyright) (Sep 2005), generally copyright has expired as follows:

Type of material		Copyright has expired if ...
A	Photographs or other works published anonymously, under a pseudonym or the creator is unknown:	taken or published prior to 1955-01-01
B	Photographs (except A):	taken prior to 1955-01-01
C	Artistic works (except A & B):	the creator died before 1955-01-01
D	Published editions¹ (except A & B):	first published more than 25 years ago
E	Commonwealth or State government owned² photographs:	first published more than 50 years ago

¹means the typographical arrangement and layout of a published work. eg. newsprint.

²owned means where a government is the copyright owner as well as would have owned copyright but reached some other agreement with the creator.

with a note to the effect: While not being a legal requirement, the Australian War Memorial requests that you assist their record keeping by leaving the number on this image intact.

Other images from the AWM have already set this precedent. See for example:

Image:1 AC Sqn (AWM 145207).jpg

Image:1 LRF (AWM P00529-005).jpg

Image:1 Para Bn (AWM 041494).jpg

I think it is a neat idea that the tracking number is worked into the filename of the above images, so the number follows the image around while not being in the image.

Given that I was the one that put the image up for deletion, I suggest that in the spirit of consensus on Wikipedia someone else should be the one to change the tags (or delete the image). Ideally the person who uploaded the image, but failing that someone independent to me. John Dalton 22:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification, John. Is it OK to remove the deletion template now? Grant65 | Talk 03:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

replied on Grant's talk page John Dalton 05:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)