Wikipedia:Copyright problems

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This page has a backlog that requires the attention of one or more administrators.
Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared.
WP:CP redirects here. For the Community Portal, see Wikipedia:Community Portal.
ATTENTION: For blatant copyright infringements:
  • If there is a clean revision in the page history, revert to it.
  • If not, request speedy deletion with {{db-copyvio|url=http://www.WhereItCameFrom.tld/}}
  • If you are not sure who originally authored the material, list it here instead for investigation.
    The request for copyright assistance page co-ordinates the various issues and requests related to copyright queries about content on Wikipedia.
    Preinclusion Help

    Can I use...  |  Could we get...  |  Can I donate...

    Postinclusion Problem Solving
    Missing copyright information  |  Violation check  |  Suspected copyright violations

    General Copyright Advice and Discussion
    General help/discussion  |  Policy discussion  |  Copyright holder assistance  |  Asking permission  |  History pages
    Shortcut:
    WP:CP
    WP:CV


    This page is part of a series about
    Copyright on Wikipedia    .  v • d • e 
    Policy and information

    Wikipedia copyright information
    Reusing Wikipedia content
    Public domain · Fair use
    GFDL license text
    Copyright information index

    Processes
    Copyright assistance overview
    Copyright violations
    Copyright problems
    General help
    Copyright examinations
    Requesting permission from 3rd parties
    Example request letters

    Items with copy-issues
    Images missing information
    Suspected copyright violations

    This page is for listing and discussing possible copyright problems on Wikipedia, including pages and images which are suspected to be infringements. To request copyright examination before including questionable content on an article, see Wikipedia:Requested copyright examinations. Remember to avoid copyright paranoia.

    Copyright owners: If you believe Wikipedia is infringing your copyright, you may request immediate removal of the copyright violation. Alternatively, you may contact Wikipedia's designated agent under the terms of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act.

    Copyright owners who submitted their own work to Wikipedia: If you submitted work to Wikipedia which you had previously published (especially online), and your submission was marked as a potential infringement of copyright, stating that you are the copyright holder of the work on the article's talk page helps, but will not likely prevent deletion. It is sufficient to either:

    • Make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL at the site of the original publication; or
    • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en at wikimedia dot org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation.

    What's copyrighted? Copyright exists automatically upon creation in a tangible form. An author does not need to apply for or even claim copyright for a copyright to exist. Only an explicit statement that the material is in the public domain, licensed with the GFDL, or is otherwise compatible with the GFDL, makes material reusable under current policy, unless it is inherently in the public domain due to age or source.

    What about fair use? Under fair use guideline, brief selections of copyrighted text may be used, but only with full attribution and only when the purpose is to comment on or criticize the text quoted.

    If you see an article somewhere else which was copied from Wikipedia without attribution, visit the GFDL compliance page or meta:Non-compliant site coordination.


    Purge server cache if recent edits are not visible.


    Contents

    [edit] Instructions

    Material whose presence on Wikipedia infringes copyright (ie. the material is not Public Domain, licensed under the GFDL or specifically licensed to Wikipedia on suitable terms) should, as a general rule, be removed.

    Blatant copyright infringements may be speedily deleted if:
    • Material was copied from another website which does not have a license compatible with Wikipedia;
    • There is no non-infringing content in the page history worth saving.
    • The infringement was introduced at once by a single person rather than created organically on wiki and then copied by another website such as one of the many Wikipedia mirrors.
    • Uploader does not assert permission (for images: no assertion aside from tags) or fair use, or the assertion is questionable

    After notifying the uploading editor, add

    {{db-copyvio|url=url of source}}

    An administrator will examine the article and decide whether to delete it or not. You should not blank the page in this instance.
    Article? Image?
    • Revert the page to a non-copyrighted version if you can
      The infringing text will remain in the page history for archival reasons unless the copyright holder asks the Wikimedia Foundation to remove it.
    • However, if all revisions have copyright problems:
      • Blank the page and replace the text with
        {{copyvio | url=insert URL here}}
      • Go to today's section and add
        * {{subst:article-cv | PageName}} from [insert URL here] ~~~~
    to the bottom of the list. Put the page's name in place of "PageName". If you do not have a URL, enter a description of the source.
    • Add the text following Maintenance use only at the bottom of the now-blanked article to the talk page of the contributor of the copyrighted material.
    • You're done!
    • Add the following to the image description page:
      {{imagevio | url=insert URL here}}~~~~
    • Go to today's section and add:
    * {{subst:image-cv | Image:ImageName}} from [insert URL here] ~~~~
    to the bottom of the list. Put the image's name in place of "ImageName". If you do not have a URL, enter a description of the source.
    • Add the following to the image uploader's talk page:
    {{subst:idw-cp | Image:ImageName}}
    • You're done!

    Pages should stay listed for a minimum of 7 days before a decision is made. All pages tagged with {{copyvio}} are placed in Category:Possible copyright violations.

    [edit] Alternatives to deletion

    In addition to nominating potential copyright infringements for deletion, you may:

    • Rewrite the article, excluding copyrighted text. This is done on a temporary page at Talk:PAGENAME/Temp so that the original, copyright-infringing version can be deleted by an administrator and the rewrite copied over. If the original turns out to be non-infringing, these two can be merged.
    • Write to the owner and Ask for permission. Check whether they gave or will give permission (or maybe they in fact posted it here!). Also see Wikipedia:Example requests for permission, Wikipedia:Confirmation of permission.

    [edit] Instructions for special cases

    • Category:Unfree images: These may be listed, if they indeed are not available under a free license or a reasonable fair use rationale. Note that some of these may not actually be unfree images, but rather images which are released under multiple licenses.
    • Non-free licenses
      These images are available for use on Wikipedia, but are not released under the GFDL. According to Jimbo Wales, we cannot use images that are not GFDL and are not usable under a fair use rationale [1]. Images from these categories may be listed here, but be sure that the image is not also available under a free license, and that a fair use claim cannot be made.
    • Probable copyvios without a known source: If you suspect that an article contains a copyright violation, but you cannot find a source for the violation (so you aren't sure that it's a violation), do not list it here. Instead, place {{cv-unsure|~~~|FULL_URL}} on the article's talk page, but replace FULL_URL with the full URL of the article version that you believe contains a violation. (To determine the URL, click on "Permanent link" in the toolbox area, and copy the URL)

    [edit] Instructions for administrators

    Listings should be checked and processed by administrators after 7 days. See Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Advice for admins for some help.

    [edit] See also

    [edit] Listings of possible copyright problems

    [edit] Older than 7 days

    Below are articles and images that have been listed here for longer than 7 days, but have not yet been dealt with.

    [edit] Poster claims to be the author or to have permission

    This section is specifically intended for pages which contain apparently non-GFDL copyright material for which a User has claimed copyright or permission(s). Initial listings of pages with suspected copyright problems should not be listed in this section. When placing items here, please post under the relevant month (eg. if the copyvio listing was first made in October 2005, please post it there). If you are a Wikipedia editor or administrator following up on a copyright problem, please place a note under the relevant listing, stating what you have done or plan to do; this will help prevent duplicated efforts at resolving the problem. Once the uploader has been notified of how to prove ownership or permission, pages should be deleted after 2-3 weeks if no proof has been forthcoming.

    If there is a claim, follow up by placing the Maintenance text found at the bottom of the tagged article on the article talk page and/or the user's talk page.

    [edit] Fair use claims needing a second opinion

    [edit] Numerous Images by smith2006 & suspect sock GeneralPatton

    I know of 11 color copyright images by Walther Frentz, and 2 copyrighted to axis101.bizland.com which smith2006/sock has uploaded. 3 of these Frentz images are so far listed as FairUse violations for deletion. There are too many for me to list them all- I suspect all of the color ww2 nazi regime photos uploaded are Frentz and it is a waste of my time to assume good faith by smith2006 and list them all. Smith2006 is so far ignoring all postings asking for clarification on talk or image/article pages.

    All the images are copyright under EU law. The copyright holder of the Frentz images, Ullstein Bild Deutschland, has previously threatened legal action against wiki over Frentz images. As a result of this threat all Frentz images were previously removed from all wikis inside 24hrs.[3]. All images upped by smith2006 should be removed or put into a status where he must prove their status/rationale. Smith2006 has proven little regard for restrictions on use of copyright images. To mask their true status, most likely noted in the books he got them from, smith2006 decided to attribute them to "scans" by himself, era photographer Heinrich Hoffmann (wrongly), or "copyright status unknown"/"probably not copyrighted". Smith2006 has also decided to double up on the use of FairUse rationale in articles even when free images or other copyrighted image already exist in the article eg. Hitler. Only case a FairUse rationale may apply to a Frentz image used is in Blondi where it is suspected that no free image of the animal exists. Ullstein will still probably request its removal however. Frentz image I so far detected: [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] axis101.bizland.com images [15] [16] Also Frentz in wikicommons [17] 82.29.229.116 17:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

    6 more such Frentz images copyright Ullstein Bild. All either incorrectly tagged, unattributed or both: [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23]. Given that a lot of the subjects of the portraits are high profile officials in the government of Nazi Germany and/or the Nazi Party it is very, very doubtful that images of them could not be taken from propaganda material and or book covers on their lives. This was even possible for Hitlers dog since I have now located an image from film to use for it. User Smith2006 and possible sock have, rather than exhaust all possibilities of locating free images, made false claims about there being no free images available and then claimed a tag of FairUse. 82.29.229.116 20:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Image:N739PA Maid of the Seas.jpg

    Image:N739PA Maid of the Seas.jpg (history · last edit) from [24]. Copyright tag was removed mentioning the fairuse. However, upon re-reading of the fairuse rationale on the image, I noticed that the uploader claimed that there are no other non-crash pics of the airliner. In Image_talk:N739PA_Maid_of_the_Seas.jpg, I provided several search results from airliners.net stemming from another arguement from another user that the uploader and the closer overlooked. Uploader then immediately removed the tag after noting that two of the images were of the same plane AND blantantly ignoring the tag instructions that the tag can only be removed by a admin. By that omission, the fairuse credibility has been effectively rendered nil by uploaders own comments. Request that the image be re-examined (since no mention was made as to if the images were alike or not) and fairuse rationale examined as well. --293.xx.xxx.xx 12:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Image:Fred Rodgers.jpg

    • (history · last edit) from [25]. Tagged as {{promophoto}}, but usatoday.com is not a source for promotional material. It's terms of use says: "you may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit, translate, sell, create derivative works, exploit, or distribute in any manner or medium ... any material from the Site" Abu badali (talk) 21:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Others

    [edit] WW2 Images needing review

    I have received the following message on my talk page:

    I've discovered 12-14 other images uploaded by Smith2006 or suspected sock GeneralPatton'. All but 2 are Frentz/Ullstein images. All are incorrectly attributed, dated, and given a misleading rationale or tag. I suspect this is deliberate. 2 of the images were deliberately lied about. Both were take from the same site- axis101.bizland.com - but with 1 listed as PD and the other as self created. On checking with the owner of the site, he didnt give permission and is the sole creator.

    Mike Rosoft 17:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] 2007-03-09

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-10

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-11

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images


    [edit] 2007-03-12

    edit

    Articles

    • Update: Please follow the link from the Google booksearch page to see the preview page. This article appears to have been copied verbatim from a copyrighted source dated 1995. -- 82.32.191.92 11:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Response - I found the 1995 source (Barron's Educational Series, from The New Food Lover's Companion, Second Edition, by Sharon Tyler Herbst) at [97]. It's a definite copyright violation. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 14:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I have gone ahead and rewritten this article from scratch. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 14:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
    edit

    Images

    • Image:Fountain in front of Garland Hall.jpg (history · last edit) from [108]. Miaers 00:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Image:Imagen 333.jpg (history · last edit) from [The Jersey are copyrighted and the beanie are a derivative work of a copyrighted work]. Nomination completed by DumbBOT 13:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Image:Nanak.jpg (history · last edit) (url not detected). Nomination completed by DumbBOT 13:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Image:Toddpalinalaska.jpeg (history · last edit) - I don't have the specific URL, but the uploader says it comes from the State of AK, which doesn't fall under the claimed federal government copyright exception. Calliopejen 17:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Image:Alaska palin.jpg (history · last edit) from [109]. Uploader claims fair use, but this use is not within the Wikipedia guidelines of identification of or commentary on the television program. Calliopejen 19:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
      • I believe the image is fair use, and my rationale has been sent to Calliopejen, my message is here: The image maybe has been put a wrong copyright tag, but I am sure it is within the fair use. Probably not the TV one, but I think {{fairusein}} would qualify. There is currently no free image to illustrate Governor Sarah Palin, so it is irreplaceable fair use. Also it is necessary to illustrate what does she look like, as Palin is certainly a nationally prominent figure. I think that explains, probably I should change the tag. Wooyi 19:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
      • I would agree that pictures of both Knowles and Palin are needed. However, I don't think it's irreplaceable fair use since they're both still politically active and always making public appearances. To get a free image, anyone could just take a photo at a political event and release it on Wikipedia. (I didn't see any available yet on flickr.) Or perhaps publicity photos are available? I didn't check the campaign websites. I don't think the best solution is to appropriate copyrighted images.Calliopejen 19:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Image:Ak-knowles.jpg (history · last edit) from here. Same reasoning as above Alaska_palin.jpg Calliopejen 19:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Same thing as the above Sarah Palin picture. Wooyi 19:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] 2007-03-13

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-14

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    • Image:Jesus-on-dinosaur.jpg (history · last edit) - unknown source, unknown status (claims to be from conservapedia article on dinosaurs, but that seems to be false was actually posted on conservapedia, no source info listed there). Andjam 04:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC) (Amended Andjam 04:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC))
    • Image:Katharine Jefferts Schori June 18 2006.jpg (history · last edit) - posted as {{PD-self}}, with photo credit to same name as contributor and another person. Contributor returned the next day to remove own name as photographer. This image (and the edit which originally added it to Katharine Jefferts Schori) are the only contribs from this user, who has not responded to an inquiry on eir user talk page and on the image's talk page about clarifying eir status as creator of the image. - Cafemusique 12:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Derivatives

    The following images are derivatives of copyrighted works. They have been altered in order to simulate singles-covers. The uploader used a CC 2.5 license tag. However, as derivatives of someone else's copyrighted works, this is clearly inappropriate, so I've removed these tags, removed the images from the articles, and notified the uploader. However, I'm not sure what criteria to use when deleting them. I thought if I posted these images here, a more experienced admin might clue me in and point to the appropriate policy. I looked, but couldn't find anything that specifically addresses derivatives of copyrighted images. Rklawton 13:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] 2007-03-15

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-16

    edit

    Articles

    Not a total swipe, but large portions of the text blocks on the page are swiped from the listed source. - TexasAndroid 16:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-17

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-18

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-19

    edit

    Articles

    I've removed it & substituted a link to a site which has the rights Hypnopomp 11:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-20

    edit

    Articles

    Note that the brainyencyclopedia page says it got some of it's content from Wikipedia. However, the formatting in the Magellanic Stream makes it nearly certain that the content was pasted from brainyencyclopedia. The Mad Genius 16:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
    brainyencyclopedia is a Wikipedia mirror. It simply copies whole articles from here. What's so suspicious about the formatting? --Reuben 23:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
    The line breaks in the source text match the formatting of the brainyencyclopedia article. Seems like a chicken-and-egg problem... The Mad Genius 03:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
    The line breaks match because brainyencyclopedia mirrors the Wikipedia article in its entirety. There is no problem. --Reuben 21:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
    Original page now states that the text can be reproduced. ... discospinster talk 14:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-21

    edit

    Articles


    • 070320 canyon hlg 6p.hlarge.jpg (history · last edit) from [DAVID MCNEW / GETTY IMAGES]. 193.172.11.178 09:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Mary's Child (history · last edit) from [304]. Note that even though the original story is out of copyright, the translation has a copyright notice dated 2001-2002 Tt 225 10:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Saint Patrick's Day (history · last edit) from [312]. NOT entire article; sample text that's duplicated, e.g., "Patrick was quite successful...". The author was notified (and responded) but permission was neither granted nor denied; contact form is on website. Wickertu 17:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Joseph Black (history · last edit) from [313]. An entire new article was inserted wholesale, totally replacing previous content (except for the picture). A lot (but not all) of this article seems copied from Britannica 15th Ed, (vol 2, p252). There are typographical errors in the article ("bor" instead of "for", "degree in°1754;"), which makes me think the article might have been scanned in from the edition of Britannica that's out of copyright. However, the source of the article is not stated. Clemwang 18:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Deborah Ellis (history · last edit) from [314]. A section (with incorrect wiki formatting) was copied from Manitoba Library Association. Copyright notice on that page says "Copyright © Dave Jenkinson and the Manitoba Library Association. Reproduction for personal use is permitted only if this copyright notice is maintained. Any other reproduction is prohibited without permission." I'm guessing that part should be removed. Clemwang 18:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
    edit

    Images

    • Image:The Red Poppy (Ulanova).jpg (history · last edit) from [318]. The photographer, George (or Georgii) Petrusov died 1971,[319] and thus PD-Russia is not applicable and his works are still under copyright, also in Russia. Lupo 10:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Image:Biro5.jpg (history · last edit) from [320]. Also, all of uploader pics of Martin Biron look to be professional AP/Getty. Given that they are pics of him in both Flyers and Sabres uniforms, I highly suspect that the uploader did not take them. ccwaters 16:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
    Also uploaded various Phillies and Flyers related images as pd-self including some that are obviously promotional images. ccwaters 16:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] 2007-03-22

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images


    [edit] New Listings

    [edit this list] (to add or to remove per-day pages)

    [edit] 2007-03-23

    edit

    Articles

    Jonathan Privett (history · last edit) from [349]. --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 08:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-24

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-25

    edit

    Articles

    Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2007_March_25/Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-26

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-27

    edit

    Articles

    LaNicoya 02:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

    Only the introductory paragraph was a copyvio. The remainder of the article was original Wikipedia content. A proposed copyvio fix is here: Talk:Minnesota's 2nd congressional district/Temp.--G1076 00:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    If you look closely, [456] is a U.S. government site. The contents are public domain. That doesn't necessarily make it OK to copy and paste everything verbatim, but I don't think it is a copyvio. older ≠ wiser 01:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    Given that this is simply a list, plus the source is clearly acknowledged, I can't see how this can be a copyvio. This is only one of numerous similar list articles (at least one of which I recall survived a previous AFD challenge) that are listed at AFI 100 Years... series. I'm not sure why this one has been singled out. 23skidoo 03:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-28

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images

    [edit] 2007-03-29

    edit

    Articles

    edit

    Images


    I would have no great objection to the loss of this image, I mistakingly thought (when I uploaded this image) that it said the images were free for all non-commercial use not personal use. Luke C 16:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] 2007-03-30

    edit

    Articles

    • Roy McWeeny (history · last edit) from [501]. Whpq 00:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Phonocardiogram (history · last edit) from [502]. This one is a bit tricky because I don't think the url I'm giving is in fact accessible to non-subscribers of IEEE. But trust me, the content I deleted is the introductory paragraph of that paper. In fact if you Google parts of sentences of what I blanked, the search engine will come up with that paper as the top hit. Pascal.Tesson 02:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
    edit

    Images


    [edit] Footer

    Wikipedia's current date is March 30, 2007. Put new listings in Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2007 March 30.

    Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/o/p/Wikipedia%7ECopyright_problems_b9ab.html"