Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2006 August 21/Images

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Images

• Image:Ist_int_terminal.jpg (history · last edit) from [1] Elektrik Blue 82 12:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Image:IST_landing.jpg (history · last edit) from [2] Elektrik Blue 82 12:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Image:Bosnian_girl_raped_by_serbs.jpeg (history · last edit) -- It was uploaded with the summary "Public domain, share alike 2.5 photo, by AP. Picture retrieved from: [3]". I found it hard to believe that AP would do this, so I tagged it with Template:No license. However, an IP editor replaced this tag with Template:cc-by-sa. I still find it so hard to believe this that I'm forgoing WP:AGF and listing the image here. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Image:The Perez Family - Durita and Juan.jpg (history · last edit) from [4]. Image is on imdb which cleary states it's copyrigthed. Was tagged as a screenshot, but it's not. Abu Badali 16:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Image:Historical Eastern Germany and so-called Sudetenland.jpg (history · last edit) from [5]. The poster claims this is not a copyrighted map as it was made in Nazi Germany, However the map shows post-1945 western border of Germany and post-1945 Polish-Russian border. Therefore this is almost certainly a copyrighted image created in the Federal Rebublic of Germany. Friendly Neighbour 19:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

The poster claims now that the image was re-published in the Soviet Union before 1973 and therefore is public domain. This is based on a false premise that re-publishing a work in a country that does not recognise copyrights cancels its copyrights in the rest of the world. Anyway, there is no evidence that the map, clearaly created by Germans for a German audience was actually ever re-published in any other country that Germany. Friendly Neighbour 05:47, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

• Image:A Beaton Camden.JPG (history · last edit) from [6]. Image of living person found on google images to illustrate the article article about the person. No evidence it's intended for wide distribution. Abu Badali 21:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Could easily be retagged {{faireusein|Alistair Beaton}}. There are precedents, aren't there? I don't understand why Abu badali crossed out taken from http://www.camdennewjournal.co.uk because that's where I got the image from. <KF> 22:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
    • As I told on the edit summary (bad english apart) and in your talk page, I crossed it because the image could not be found at the given source. I have now updated the link to what seems to be the proper source. Unfortunatelly, the source doesn't makes it cleat that the image "has clearly been taken for promotional purposes". --Abu Badali 22:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Well, I made a mistake there. I myself retagged the image (from {{promophoto}} to {{fairusein|Alistair Beaton}}) about a month ago, so why is the question whether it "has clearly been taken for promotional purposes" relevant at all? Also, the "proper source"—the Camden New Journal—has been linked to ever since the photo was uploaded (as I pointed out here, this is a case of link rot), so where's the problem now? <KF> 22:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
        • To use this tag, we must explain why this image "does not fall into one of the blanket fair use categories listed at Wikipedia:Fair use#Images" and "include the source of the work, all available copyright information, and a detailed fair use rationale". You may want to know that the use of unfree images of living people is discouraged.
          • Interesting. According to Wikipedia:Fair use#Images, Beaton's image "does not fall into one of the blanket fair use categories" because—hey—it is not a publicity photograph. We have cited the source of the image, haven't we, including the anonymous photographer (who is irrelevant anyway because article and photo are © New Camden Journal), and the detailed fair use rationale in this case is that it is (a) a nice picture (Beaton won't bear us a grudge for using it) and (b) one of the very few available. So again: Where's the problem? <KF> 23:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
            • "It's a nice picture" is not a fair use rationale. --Abu Badali 12:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • To chime in here: Anyone could take a photo of him and license the photo under the GFDL; the photo is not of a significant event; nor is it "iconic". For these reasons, it does not pass our "fair use" guidelines at Wikipedia. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 15:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Image:SirHughMunro.jpg (history · last edit) from [7]. Shell ^babelfish 23:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
• Image:000B1A07-1F3F-121B-84A180BFB6FA0000.jpg (history · last edit) from [8]. Ytny 23:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
• Image:Dulce Maria Savaman.jpg (history · last edit) from [9]. Flcikr image marked as "All Righs reserved"Abu Badali 23:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)