Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For image or media copyright questions, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions
Wikipedia copyright
Policy
Copyright policy
Copyright violation policy
Reusing Wikipedia content
Text of the GFDL
Guidelines
Public domain content
Non-free content
Copyright information index
Processes
Suspected copyright violations
Copyright problems
Copyright examinations
Resources
General help
Copyright assistance
Media copyright questions
Requesting copyright permission
Image copyright tags
Donating copyrighted material
Archive
Archives
About archives • Edit this box

See also: Wikipedia:Public domain, m:Do fair use images violate the GFDL?, m:copyright, m:fair use, m:GFDL, m:GFDL Workshop.

Contents

[edit] Old works still copyrighteable?

Hello,

I'm having trouble with

http://www.ub.unibe.ch/content/bibliotheken_sammlungen/sondersammlungen/sammlung_ryhiner/bestellformular/index_ger.html

Thing is, there are images of maps and such which would be in the public domain because of their age; but in order to view them you are required to click an "accept copyright" button, which states that the images can only be used with their permission. The images are watermarked, even. Is it safe to upload them to wikipedia with a public-domain-old tag?

Thanks in advance, --5wh1t5 (talk) 19:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] here's another notice

I know that it's hard to get copyright violations dealt with here, but I'm willing to give it another shot. If someone want's to deal with this persistent person, that's great. Image:Polishlancers garde.jpg is a typical example of [1] this user's uploads. It was uploaded to WP, deleted from WP as a copyright violation, uploaded to the commons, deleted from the commons as a copyright violation, then uploaded back to wikipedia (all by the above user). Despite the fact that this user has repeatedly flaunted the policy, and repeatedly uploaded material that he knows is a copyright violation, no-one has had the balls to ban the user or delete the images.

[edit] Hi

My Name is Raj. I am the owner of www.pujyaya.org. This is a public website and what i am including is the brief history of this great person.

Please let me know if you have any questions. This is done in good faith.

Thanks Raj

[edit] Maybe copyright problems?

On it wiki thanks a copyright bot we have found some copyright problem on en.wiki i will signal here:

Thanks a lot for the attention Lusum —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.221.100.72 (talk) 18:08, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This page needs a proper archive and categories

I want to review a copyvio reported a year ago and cannot (easily). Please categorize pages like Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2007 May 16; we could use a lost of articles divided by months and so on (WP:RD does it well).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

If you know the date the go to the page using the established naming convention Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2007 June 9 if you know the article go the article and use the Special:WhatLinksHere function which will (should) still list the specific report the article was reported on. Jeepday (talk) 11:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plagiarism of a wiki article

I've spent half an hour looking for somewhere where I can report copying of a wiki article by an outside site. I found a dozen ways to report Wiki material copying outside content but no way to report license abuse outside of wiki. Anyway -


www.squidoo.com/the-history-of-drum-and-bass

is blatant plagiarism of

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_drum_and_bass

--Dustek (talk) 18:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

See WP:MIRROR and WP:GFDLC. Sancho 04:33, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removing images from infoboxes

Many infobox templates contain an entry for an image, and frequently when a legal image isn't available, a placeholder image is used. I have noticed a pattern that when that placeholder image has been replaced by a violating image, that the violating image is just deleted from the infobox, rather than the placeholder being restored. This is a bad practice and there should be a policy in place to prevent it. In my opinion the policy should be as follows:

  1. In the even that an infobox template contains a blank entry for an image, any administrator viewing the article should add the appropriate image from Category:Wikipedia_image_placeholders
  2. In the even that a violating image is placed in the infobox, it should be replaced with the appropriate image from Category:Wikipedia_image_placeholders, and not simply deleted
  3. If an editor or administrator does just delete the image, they should be notified of the this policy on their user talk page.
  4. If after being notified, they repeatedly continue to just delete images, their account should be suspended for an appropriate number of days, or until they contact the suspending administrator and agree to comply with this policy.

- MistyWillows (talk) 01:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

We could have the infobox templates supply the placeholder by default when an image isn't provided. As for creating policy, see Wikipedia:how to create policy. I don't think anything extreme needs to be done other than reminders/requests to editors that forget to replace the placeholder, and even this wouldn't be necessary if the templates default to providing the place holder. Sancho 04:26, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Free image use

The Lost Cause (song) page used to include a non-free image. The image's page stated (before I removed the image and the message ([2])) that this was a violation of Wikipedia's non-free content criteria because it was being used on a page other than the one described in the image description. I noticed that the Cellphone's Dead page has simmilar image use, but there is nothing mentioning a violation on that image's page. Is the way that the image on Cellphone's Dead is used okay, or has no one spotted this violation? If it is okay, would the Lost Cause image be okay too? And how would I go about clarifying this on the image's page? Thanks! You're dreaming eh? 01:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alternative to {{copyvio}}?

When all versions of an article contain some text with copyright problems, is it OK to delete the plagiarized text and leave the rest (categories, infoboxes etcetera) and rewrite in our own words in place?

Or is it always required to move the unencumbered material to a temporary page and place the {{copyvio}} tag for administrative deletion of the original article?

An example is this diff: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Desmond_Shawe-Taylor&diff=prev&oldid=214185703

Is that kind of thing ok? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 17:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Your corrections look fine. Jeepday (talk) 23:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
That is good to know. I am not a copyright vigilante, but I do like to resolve potential problems when I see them, and your guidance makes that easier. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plagiarism RFC

Hi. I started an RFC on a plagiarism issue here: [3]. I'm not sure if it is a copyright matter also, but I thought editors interested in these topics might contribute to the RFC. Thanks. Life.temp (talk) 10:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)