Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2007 January 6/Images

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

edit

Images

The image Scott Crago.jpg is completley owned by Angelfire.com and Alex Solca. References to the image have been placed on the article concerned.

  • Image:MaclynMcCarty.jpg (history · last edit) from [2]. "In this instance, however, it has either not been possible to identify or contact the current copyright owner." MECU≈talk 05:01, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Image:Pirate-onesie.jpg (history · last edit) from [3]. Nomination completed by DumbBOT 13:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Image:Kenan dogulu.jpg (history · last edit) from [www.bianet.org/kadin/010/serdar.htm]. MECU≈talk 17:45, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Image:RV John P. Tully.gif (history · last edit) from [4]. MECU≈talk 18:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I didn't see that notice when I uploaded this image. I thought LBL was a Division of the Department of Energy, and, as such works performed there were in the public domain. So, let me see if I understand this. The UofC says the DOE merely contracts the running of LBL, and LBL is a UofC facility, not a DOE facility -- and the employees are UofC employees, not DOE employees, not employees of the US Federal government? Have I got that right? Geo Swan 20:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Image:Yanukovych brussels.jpg (history · last edit) from [5]. Oden 21:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Website says: "All rights reserved. All materials on this site belong to Viktor Yanukovych’s Press Centre. © 2004-2006 In case any of these site materials are used, reference to ya2006.com.ua is obligatory." The image is being licensed as {{attribution}}, but is apparently copyrighted with "all right reserved". The language does not suggest that the copyright holder allows for any use provided the source is attributed. There is also a free image on the commons: Image:Yanukovych.jpg. --Oden 22:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Keep and reprimand user:Oden for bad faith tagging, continued stalking and harassment. The statement at the source clearly allows reuse provided the attribution is given. GFDL are also "copyrighted". This particular image is copyrighted but free to be used. The tag says exactly that. Oden just keeps attacking images of anyone who disagreed with him in the past to avenge criticism. --Irpen 22:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Keep per Irpen. --Kuban Cossack 23:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Strong Delete per nom -- what part of "all rights reserved" is weakened by demanding attribution? The demand for attribution may be simply unnecessary. I would think that without a phrase explicitly allowing reuse, that the right to control reuse is "reserved." Mangojuicetalk 20:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)