Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2007 August 31

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Image:PacificSkyBrisbane.jpg 2 Image:SinclairCastle1.jpg 3 Image:Marryman.jpg 4 Image:GlobWarming.jpg 5 Image:Asin-Reliance06.jpg

[edit] Image:PacificSkyBrisbane.jpg

Claims to be a self-taken image, yet the image is low-resolution and lacks metadata. Almost all of the uploader's previous image uploads have been deleted due to reasons such as copyright violations, lacking source info, etc. according to the uploader's log. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dream out loud (talk • contribs) 19:13, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:SinclairCastle1.jpg

No indication how (and if) the artist released the rights. // Liftarn

[edit] Image:Marryman.jpg

User has uploaded five images, claiming all five are his own work. Three of the images are provably not his own work. The user apparently mistakenly believes that grabbing something from the Internet transfers rights to him. User originally uploaded under {{cc-by-2.5}}. Image was then tagged with {{nsd}}. User than erased no source warning, and changed license to {{FAL}}. I retagged the image as still missing source (as it was), and informed the user of the problem [1]. User then add "my work" to all five of his image uploads, erasing no source warning and left me a message on my talk page [2] to which I left a reply [3]. Though I've not been able to positively identify Internet locations for this image, based on the user uploading three other images under identical circumstances to this one, I think it's highly unlikely this is a creation of the user. --Durin 14:27, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The user is not a "he" but a "she" who have created the work long ago and is a known contributor to main magazines. The work was donated to a foundation for the children for using in printing for collection of funds. If the material has gone around and someone else claims ownership is not only not the doing of the author but is also a legal matter. The user acting on this should provide all evidence he allegedly may have so that legal steps can be followed. Furthermore, he should assume good faith and alert the author abot someone else claiming ownership and not accusing who he doesn't know, he will be much better off and will act more fairly. The images can be deleted by the time being, however, all possible evidence of who and where is claiming ownership must be provided for legal steps may follow Vanished user 14:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC).

• That the images were donated to a foundation for children does not make them available under a free license. Rights to the images transfers to the foundation the images were donated to. Thus, the foundation they were donated to will need to make a formal release to m:OTRS, which is the appropriate way to handle this. As for legal steps, I'm sorry this is not a court case and if you want to make it one, please observe Wikipedia:No legal threats. --Durin 14:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

You absolutely don't know what you are talking about, first of all donated work and registered as donation for free use is for free use, not transfer of right, a release was notarized and registered as well as published FYI. It was my work, donated ages ago to free use, that is why you found it in internet. Strange place this Wikiworld, you are guilty until proven innocent LOL. I didn't threaten Wikipedia by the way, I WANT to know who claims my work as his Vanished user 14:53, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

• On Wikipedia, we assume media is copyrighted until provably available under a free license. Your statements on this matter have been contradictory. You claimed at first that you donated these images to a foundation. If so, then the foundation retains rights and they must release rights. Making available under a free license and then supposedly donating them is contradictory. If it's available under a free license, there's no donation. I think you're best off taking this matter up with m:OTRS. If you're concerned about others violating your copyright (impossible, at least under your claims, since you claim they're available under a free license...another contradiction) then please take it up with the sites that I've found to be hosting the images. Thank you, --Durin 14:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately you seem to be quite lost about artist copyrights when donated through notarized contract of release for free and equal use. Perhaps you keep to what you know and we will all be just fine. By the way, you have failed to provide evidence on who claims ownership of my work, but I guess you just "saw" it in internet right? Vanished user 15:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:GlobWarming.jpg

Same reason as Marryman.jpg above. Same user. --Durin 14:27, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Sane as above, same wrong attitude Vanished user 14:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Asin-Reliance06.jpg

There is a watermark the image comes from asinonline.com (?). The current license from the uploader is GFDL. — Indon (reply) — 15:53, 31 August 2007 (UTC)