Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 June 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< May 31 June 2 >

Contents

[edit] June 1

[edit] Image:Indian_Meal_Moth_damage.jpg

No evidence permission was granted to use image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 02:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Indian_Peacekeepers.gif

No evidence permission was granted to use image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 02:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:OCPA-2005-08-11-080331.jpg

Listed as "Courtesy image" on image source site, not explicitly listed as a US Army/Gov't image BillCJ (talk) 05:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

  • This link should clarify the situation: http://www4.army.mil/armyimages/armyimage.php?photo=7158 At the bottom of the page, it states: "Images on the Army Web site are cleared for release and are considered in the public domain. Request credit be given as "Photo Courtesy of U.S. Army" and credit to individual photographer whenever possible."PistolPete037 (talk) 22:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Barbette03.jpg

no evidence that there was no compliance w/ copyright formalities Mangostar (talk) 05:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

  • What evidence of this negative would you like? The image was published in the United Kingdom in 1926 and was never to the best of my ability to locate published in the United States. Otto4711 (talk) 12:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • While I still believe that this is in the public domain, I have added a fair-use rationale in the event that it is not, as the image is acceptable under WP:FU. Otto4711 (talk) 23:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:362011p5ran444z9.jpg

Image name, watermark suggests unfree image. — Amog |Talk 13:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:SOPposternov5.jpg

GFDL claim - But clearly a movie poster Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:23, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:SOPposternov5.jpg

GFDL claim - But clearly a movie poster Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:23, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Apple-wireless-keyboard-aluminum-2007new.jpg

Product- Does design right exist? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

  • uhh...I thought you couldn't copyright utilitarian objects. We usually don't factor design rights in because this is a PHOTO of something, not an actual something we made a recreation of. ViperSnake151 16:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Yunakimfestaonice.jpg

GFDL Claim - But source listed claims 'All Rights Reserved' Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Rubyrana.jpg

watermark suggests unfree image — Amog |Talk 13:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Sumikhadka.jpg

watermark suggests unfree image — Amog |Talk 13:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Poonamghimire.jpg

watermark suggests unfree image — Amog |Talk 13:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Payal1.jpg

watermark suggests unfree image — Amog |Talk 13:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:AnitaGurung.jpg

watermark, background logos suggest unfree image — Amog |Talk 13:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Missnepal.jpg

Unfree logos of Dabur and Vatika — Amog |Talk 13:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment:I meant he has uploaded more than the handful of suspected images I've added here.We need someone to check out the rest of his pictures. - Amog |Talk 10:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:HaroldGodwinson.jpg

Not a free image and if fair-use were claimed it would be replaceable either by an image taken from any of several out of print works on numismatics available on Google books, or at the Internet Archive, or by taking a trip to a museum holding one of these coins and making a picture. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Linux sreenshot.jpg

orphaned, possibly unfree due to Skype logo (and we've gone overboard on the Firefox logo before) ViperSnake151 16:34, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Eh, given that the logo is incidental to the image, I would say it is free enough (kind of like of you happen to catch a copyrighted logo on somebody's t-shirt in a crowd). IronGargoyle (talk) 21:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:ANT_NDEC_wiki.jpg

It is likely that ITV reserve exclusive rights to photography of Saturday Night Live, so the stated licensing is invalid. The quality is definitely not worth the dubious copyright status. — BigBlueFish (talk) 18:34, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Note that the licensing of some of the other uploading user's contributions may also have the same issue. BigBlueFish (talk) 18:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:InduKotiStotra.jpg

No evidence permission was given to release the image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 21:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Interrupted_by_reality_while_dreaming.jpg

Uploader does not appear to be copyright holder as claimed. Nv8200p talk 22:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)