Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2006 August 10/Images

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

edit

Images

  • Image:RubyBranchesOut.jpg (history · last edit) from famous Pulitzer Prize winning photograph by Robert H. Jackson. User has no rights to release modified version of Jackson's copyrighted photo as "PD-self". Infrogmation 04:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

COMMENT: Since the creator of the parody-work is me, who else is going to license it? I'm the creator of the montage. The work is indeed a parody photo-montage which uses (photoshop blended) parts of two other photos, one a historical iconic photo, and the other a Star Wars movie publicity photo (Fair use). I'm perfectly happy to acknowledge both sources, but the montage is a new work, a bit like Warhol's Campbell soup cans.

Fair use may also apply to the work, but I had to choose one label or the other. Since Mr. Jackson's photo does not show Ruby shooting Jar Jar, this one which does is clearly a parody work of art, a category covered under fair use. It is a partial reproduction, it is a poor reproduction, it is an altered reproduction. It was not created for commercial purposes. Mr. Jackson or his heirs or present owners of copyright on the source photos cannot possibly be harmed by creation of such a parody, anymore than the original authors of a song are harmed by a Weird Al Yankovic version. Nobody goes out to buy a poster of Mr. Jackson's original shot of Ruby shooting Oswald, then doesn't buy it because they are satisfied instead by a low resolution image they got off the web, of Ruby shooting an unpopular Star Wars character! I trust the same goes for people who need a good image of Jar Jar, and want to buy one, and settle instead for this. As I read [2] this image fails every one of the four court tests for copyright violation. Opinions solicited. SBHarris 21:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Assuming that this image qualifies for fair use (I'd say it probably does), then I think you can release your modifications into the public domain, but the image is still using elements of two copyrighted pictures under fair use. So the image description page should certainly have some kind of fair use tag, and it should have a statement that explains the licensing situation.
That being said, fair-use images are not allowed on Wikipedia unless they are being used in an article. I can't see how this image could be used in an article, so my opinion is that this image does not belong on Wikipedia. —Bkell (talk) 21:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Could be. It may have place in Fan criticism of George Lucas, which is partly what I intended, when I made it. I'll try it there (deleting from Oswald) and let you know how it fares. SBHarris 22:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Be careful that you aren't doing original research here. It's a questionable idea to make a parody image yourself and then put it into a Wikipedia article. I think this image is inappropriate for fan criticism of George Lucas, because the image itself isn't notable and in fact doesn't exist outside of Wikipedia. Perhaps Uncyclopedia would be a more suitable venue for your work. (I think the image is pretty good; it's certainly funnier than most of the stuff on Uncyclopedia, so you'd be improving things.) —Bkell (talk) 23:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)