Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 February 21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< February 20	February 22 >

1 February 21

[edit] February 21

[edit] Image:Edunphy.jpg

This is a weird one - the page where the image comes from does indeed say content is licensed under GFDL. But that's because all of the page's content comes from Wikipedia, which means that the source website doesn't own the copyright to the image. Mosmof (talk) 05:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ahly ultras violence in ismailya2.jpg

The watermark suggest the image is probably not free. Mosmof (talk) 07:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ultras ahlawy in ismailya 2.jpg

Same as above, clearly watermarked with URL. Mosmof (talk) 07:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Pat Douthwaite - Homage to Brian Jones.JPG

Questionable PD licence. It's a photograph of a 1969 painting by a deceased artist. Wwwhatsup (talk) 09:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC) It looks okay to me...I wouldnt worry about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.121.19.17 (talk) 19:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:NonitoDonaire.JPG

source website does not specify PD status bluemask ^(talk) 10:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

The Boxing Encylopedia is an encyclopedia that is very similar to Wikipedia. The only difference is that this one is an encyclopedia exclusively for articles related to boxing. Because of the similarity of the two, it's possible that they're somehow linked. True, the image from there doesn't specify it's PD status but it doesn't say that it's copyrighted either. If that image is copyrighted, then it shouldn't be there in the first place coz that would be copyright infringement. But it's been there for some time already. Because of this, it most likely free. Wubzy (talk) 05:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't work like that - the burden on the proof falls on the uploader to provide evidence of the copyright status. Since it's obvious that the Boxing Encyclopedia didn't create the image, without further source information, the assumption is that someone owns the copyright. --Mosmof (talk) 19:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

True, the Boxing Encyclopedia didn't create the image. Well if the image is copyrighted in some way, the question is "Why was it uploaded there, why whoever owns it never complained, and why the Boxing Encyclopedia just let it stay?" Because of these factors, the copyright holder is most likely the uploader who chooses to release some of his/her works. I wish users of Wikipedia should get to know more about the Boxing Encyclopedia. Because of the similarity and possible relationship of the two editable encyclopedias, shouldn't it be possible for Wikipedia to adopt things from there? Wubzy (talk) 23:45, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

You're missing my point - it's up to you to show reasonable evidence that this image is free evidence, and neglect on another Wiki site isn't good enough. Let's use Occam's Razor here - for your conclusion to be plausible, we have to assume that

the Boxing Encyclopedia user is the copyright owner, but
he licensed a professional-level photo as GFDL
he forgot to credit himself
he neglected to provide any other source information
removed the EXIF data from the photo
uploaded a cropped, low rez version despite having a high-rez, full version in possession

On the other hand, to believe that this image is copyvio, you have to assume that

the Boxing Encyclopedia user found the photo somewhere on the internet
was either ignorant about image licenses or being deceitful and gave it an incorrect license
Boxing Encyclopedia users are less diligent/strict about copyright and neglected to question the GFDL license

You can see which conclusion requires fewer assumptions, and I think we know which set of assumptions are more plausible than the other. --Mosmof (talk) 00:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I just read a section from the Boxing Encyclopedia. It shows that it does share the same copyright policy as Wikipedia.[1]Wubzy (talk) 02:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Then it should be deleted from both sides for lacking adequate source information. --Mosmof (talk) 05:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

What I meant to say is this. Like Wikipedia, users of the Boxing Encyclopedia are also advised to only uploaded images which they created or have the copyright holder's permission. This means the images there are very unlikely to be copyvios.

As to why the images of Nonito Donaire on both sides lack source or information, I don't know. As a matter of fact, all photos posted on Boxing Encyclopedia articles are the same. They only contained the date on when they were uploaded and the user who uploaded them. Again, I'm not sure why. Maybe to them, adding things like tags or written words about the pic are redundant but that doesn't mean they take copyright for granted. Therefore, I strongly believe the pic is free and should be kept. I can't believe a lot users here have no sense of art and wanted to remove the things that are worth a thousand words. If this image is copyrighted in anyway, then whoever owns it should have complained a long time ago. A complaint from the copyright holder is what defines copyright violation. Wubzy (talk) 23:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

It's too bad not many users in Wikipedia know anything about the Boxing Encyclopedia. Since the two are somehow connected judging by the their similarity, it's only right that Wikipedia should use some pics from there. 210.4.122.54 (talk) 12:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Against PSG Ultrasahlawy.jpg

Watermark with URL suggests this imageis unfree. Mosmof (talk) 14:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ahlyfans1.jpg

Same as above, watermarked with URL. Mosmof (talk) 14:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ultras ahlawy in ismailya.jpg

Same as above, watermarked with URL.

[edit] Image:471650181 47b3e1e354 o.jpg

Tagged {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}, but the Flickr source page [2] says it's licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic. "Noncommercial" is not free enough for Wikipedia. —Bkell (talk) 14:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:471651297 1744d6deee o.jpg

Tagged {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}, but the Flickr source page [3] says it's licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic. "Noncommercial" is not free enough for Wikipedia. —Bkell (talk) 14:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:1448078887 cdeb152a96 o.jpg

Tagged {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}, but the Flickr source page [4] says it's licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic. "Noncommercial" is not free enough for Wikipedia. —Bkell (talk) 14:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Nwlovertheedge.jpg

Logo of http://www.ote.com.au/ jonny-m t 15:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bx.jpg

Logo of Bucci Xchange (see http://www.stylechicago.com/Favorites.asp?ParentID=89&ID=7263) jonny-m t 15:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:2494539 1.jpg

Appears to be a derivative of The Matrix, which makes it subject to copyright. jonny-m t 15:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:NWLInYourHouse.jpg

Seems to be a derivate image from The Matrix and is thus subject to copyright restrictions. jonny-m t 15:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:200px-Nwalogobw.jpg

Seems to be a derivative image of Image:Nwalogobw.JPG and is thus subject to copyright restrictions. jonny-m t 15:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Milinda.jpg

copyvio of http://www.heraldartdesign.com/milinda/milindaHQ.png (page) -- lucasbfr ^talk 18:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Rabbiamar.jpg

Israel government pics are NOT free use; no Fair use rational as subject is publicly active ; Uploader's page is indefinately blocked DGtal (talk) 18:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Saying plum candies.jpg

Samuell Lift me up or put me down 23:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Burned meat.jpg

Samuell Lift me up or put me down 23:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Engrish.JPG

Image of a sign that is most likely not PD Samuell Lift me up or put me down 23:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Welcome next time.jpg

Image of a sign that is most likely not PD Samuell Lift me up or put me down 23:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Steek.JPG

Image of a sign that is most likely not PD Samuell Lift me up or put me down 23:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

This image is one I personally took while walking through a government office in Taipei, Taiwan. I thought I already released it GFDL.LoopTel (talk) 19:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC) I clicked GFDL. I have no problem releasing it to public domain. Do I need to send in a notarized document?LoopTel (talk) 20:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not the license that's the problem, it's the sign, which is not GFDL. Samuell Lift me up or put me down —Preceding comment was added at 00:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The sign was posted on a door of a Taiwan government building, which was, still is, open to the public. The sign should have same copyright protection as a highway direction sign.LoopTel (talk) 01:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

- Image kept per talk -Nv8200p talk 13:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Fujian 021.jpg

Image of a sign that is most likely not PD Samuell Lift me up or put me down 23:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I took this photo myself whilst on holidays in Shenzhen in 2006 and I hold the copyright for it. In China public signs are public domain by default, there are no copyright provisions covering public signs. If you believe this to be different, please support your claim by quoting from the relevant Chinese legislation regarding copyright on public signs in China, should such legislation exist. Thanks. Even so, in any case I believe "fair use" applies here. By the way, please don't use abbreviations such as "PD" when lodging disputes and use normal English instead. Duprie37 (talk) 00:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Please see Official text copyright for more information on official texts being in the public domain in Mainland China. Official texts are also in the public domain in Taiwan by the way so I believe you have no reason to claim these images infringe copyright. Duprie37 (talk) 06:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

IMage kept per Duprie37 - Nv8200p talk 13:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Warm suggestion.jpg

Image of a sign that is most likely not PD Samuell Lift me up or put me down 23:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Gluttonousposter.jpg

Image of a sign that is most likely not PD Samuell Lift me up or put me down 23:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:ChinglishRegulations.jpg