Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 May 31

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< May 30 June 1 >

Contents

[edit] May 31

[edit] Image:Mizan Zainal Abidin.png

No evidence of Creative Commons license seen on source page. English language front page says "Copyright by Parliament Malaysia, Bangunan Parlimen, 50680 Kuala Lumpur." Infrogmation (talk) 11:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Suman.jpg

I don't quite think that the uploader is the copyright holder. Instead, I believe that the image is copyrighted material of a media organization covering a private/public function that the actor seemed to have been attending. I may assume good faith, but the uploader's past actions don't quite convince me. Mspraveen (talk) 15:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:DaggubatiVenkatesh.jpeg

The upload summary clearly suggests that the uploader has edited the image before uploading it. The image, for me, appears to be a screenshot of a film and the copyrights, should hence, lie with the film's producers. Mspraveen (talk) 17:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Shivanna1.jpg

The image, according to me, clearly is a publicity image generated for promoting the actor's film. I don't quite believe that the uploader is the copyright holder for the image. Mspraveen (talk) 17:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Two-hand-walkover-valdez.gif

This appears to be clip from a video, making me wary the uploader "made" the animated .gif from a copyrighted broadcast. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 17:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

This animated gif is a clip from a video of my daughter at her dance recital. I am pleased that you regard the performance to be worthy of broadcast :) and I will make a statement about the source on the image page to resolve this.Lambtron (talk) 18:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Good deal. I didn't expect malice in intent, but perhaps mistaken understanding. I'm quite pleased to find it was neither. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 18:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Nagesh old.jpg

I don't quite believe that the uploader is the copyright holder. Going by his past additions, it doesn't convince me of the same. Mspraveen (talk) 17:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:MarineDrive0.jpg

No evidence of CC-BY-SA-2.5 license at given source. Kelly hi! 19:00, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Yet another assumption of bad faith from your side. I have already told you that I was not aware of OTRS till now, and I have also specifically mentioned on your talk page that I am in the process of forwarding permission letters to OTRS. Why you have put this forward for deletion is beyond me.--thunderboltz(TALK) 19:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
It's not an assumption of bad faith...please! Images listed here are left undeleted for two weeks after listing, that should leave plenty of time for you to verify the license claim. Kelly hi! 19:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Harman–.jpeg

This is clearly a screenshot of Love Story 2050. I'm trying to find out some publicity images from the production company that will prove the blatant copyright infringement. I don't quite believe the GFDL claims of the uploader Mspraveen (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ganesh1.JPG

Source website only says ©Copyright Greynium Information Technologies Pvt. Ltd. as against the claim of CC-by-SA. Mspraveen (talk) 19:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

In addition, you can see the watermark on the image. Mspraveen (talk) 17:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Darshan.jpg

I don't believe that the uploader is the copyright holder. Looks like some clipping from somewhere. From the uploader's past record, I don't believe he/she holds the copyrights and released it thereof. Mspraveen (talk) 19:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Camp Minsi images

The uploading editor released these images into the public domain as the copyright holder. The proper copyright holder would be the Mini Trails Council of the Boy Scouts of America. This images were used in the deleted article Camp Minsi and are now orphaned. The uploading editor has not been active since November 2007. —— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 20:07, 31 May 2008 (UTC)