Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 May 20

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< May 19 May 21 >

Contents

[edit] May 20

[edit] Image:Vmlogo.gif

It is a logo of a school,and matches the one on [1] — Amog |Talk 09:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Top1new.jpg

Logo of a bank,and matches the one on [2] — Amog |Talk 09:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ob logo.gif

Bank logo,and a cropped version of [3] — Amog |Talk 09:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:SHDYGNET YG Logo 2.jpg

Blatantly contains the logo of E. W. Scripps Company, which is not free. asenine say what? 12:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, if I remember correctly I asked for help on what to do about the matter the very day I uploaded the picture but I never got an answer... It's not my fault!!! WIKIVUE Detroit (talk) TUE MAY 20 2008 10:22 PM EDT | WED MAY 21 2008 2:22 AM UTC

It's no-one's fault. You just simply should have read image inclusion guidelines. asenine say what? 14:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:SwonderIce2.jpg

The shadowing and partial image at the bottom and right edges of this image make it likely this image was downloaded from somewhere, and not taken by the uploader. The arena's website is http://www.swonder.evansville.net/ but I couldn't find it there. --Geniac (talk) 13:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Strong keep - That is complete and utter assumption based on absolutely no evidence. asenine say what? 14:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I have deleted this image for lack of verifiable source and copyright information. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Fred kempe photo.JPG

Site states that text is available under the GFDL, but says nothing about images. Kelly hi! 15:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me that this is carrying copyright paranoia a little far, even for WP:PUI. A site goes out of its way to copyleft the text with an license that only probably 1% of the non-Wikipedian community knows anything about, but they don't do the same for the images? I would strongly suspect that if the images were not GFDL they would specify that. Also, sometimes "text" can refer to an entire body of a work. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Kept, very likely GFDL with no evidence of a non-free copyright. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:SALogoMay08.PNG

The uploader claims that the logos of individual airlines are able to be used by Star Alliance, which is probably is able to, however, WP:LOGO does not allow for the use of logos under claims of fair use of individual airlines (or any company) on any article other than that individual airline article. Every time a variation of this logo montage is removed due to the non-valid fair use claim, another variation is uploaded in its place, so I would be inclined to say that the uploader of these logos is ignoring policies in regards to uploaded of non-free images. Россавиа Диалог 19:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. To the extent that Star Alliance is an entity that can hold copyright, this can be its logo. Star Alliance obviously has permission to use the logos of member airlines in its own logo. It is analogous to the logo of NBC Universal, which combined the logos of NBC and Universal. IronGargoyle (talk) 04:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Firstly, this is not the logo of Star Alliance. It is a montage of the Star Alliance logo together with the logos of the airlines (which have likely given permission for Star Alliance to use for promo purposes). Whether Star Alliance has permission or not is irrelevant, as Star Alliance is not the holder of trademarks for the individual airline logos, and we do not have permission on WP to use these logos. Furthermore, it is claimed that this 'logo' is taken from a file, which happens to be a timetable, and the graphic as it is shown on WP is not found in that timetable. The use of this graphic on WP does not meet any criteria of fair use. --Россавиа Диалог 09:14, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm... I assumed that this was the official logo. That being said, it is used as a defacto logo to represent the group, so it seems as though it should be allowed. In regards to your other point, trademark law is completely different from copyright law and is not really covered by NFCC (e.g., see Image:Siemens AG logo.svg, which is hosted by commons). IronGargoyle (talk) 13:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:North Shore 1.jpg

Uploaded under a claim of PD, but image copyrighted. Unclear whether uploader is author therefore PD-self. mattbr 20:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete - It says 'used with permission' but there is no OTRS link. asenine say what? 14:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Red Cliffs4.jpg

Uploaded under a claim of PD, but image copyrighted. Unclear whether uploader is author therefore PD-self. mattbr 21:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete - It says 'used with permission' but there is no OTRS link. asenine say what? 14:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ekaterina Polovnikova.jpg

This is listed as having been released by the uploader into the public domain, but the comment says "from www.chessbase.com" which makes me doubt that. This image is used only on a BLP. Avruch T 21:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)