Wikipedia:Media copyright questions

Media copyright questions
Welcome to the Media Copyright Questions page, a place for help with image copyrights, tagging, non-free content, and related questions. For all other questions please see Wikipedia:Questions. How to add a copyright tag to an existing image On the description page of the image (the one whose name starts File:), click Edit this page. From the page Wikipedia:File copyright tags, choose the appropriate tag: For work you created yourself, use one of the ones listed under the heading "For image creators". For a work downloaded from the internet, please understand that the vast majority of images from the internet are not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. Exceptions include images from flickr that have an acceptable license, images that are in the public domain because of their age or because they were created by the United States federal government, or images used under a claim of fair use. If you do not know what you are doing, please post a link to the image here and ask BEFORE uploading it. For an image created by someone else who has licensed their image under an acceptable Creative Commons or other free license, or has released their image into the public domain, this permission must be documented. Please see Requesting copyright permission for more information. Type the name of the tag (e.g.; {{Cc-by-4.0}}), not forgetting {{ before and }} after, in the edit box on the image's description page. Remove any existing tag complaining that the image has no tag (for example, {{untagged}}) Hit Publish changes. If you still have questions, go on to "How to ask a question" below. How to ask a question To ask a new question hit the "Click here to start a new discussion" link below. Please sign your question by typing ~~~~ at the end. Check this page for updates, or request to be notified on your talk page. Don't include your email address, for your own privacy. We will respond here and cannot respond by email. Note for those replying to posted questions If a question clearly does not belong on this page, reply to it using the template {{mcq-wrong}} and, if possible, leave a note on the poster's talk page. For copyright issues relevant to Commons where questions arising cannot be answered locally, questions may be directed to Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright.
Click here to start a new discussion

(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)

File:My Father's Tears and Other Stories cover art for 2009 collection, Alfred A. Knopf.jpg

I'm not sure that File:My Father's Tears and Other Stories cover art for 2009 collection, Alfred A. Knopf.jpg needs to be licensed as non-free since it appears to be nothing more that the book's title and the author's name on a sky-blue background. Since the book was published by an American publishing company, this would seem to be too simple for copyright protection per c:COM:TOO United States. The file's non-free use doesn't seem to be problematic per se; the file just doesn't seem to need to be treated as non-free. Any opinions regarding whether this needs to remain non-free? -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Certainly does not meet the US threshold of originality for me. Felix QW (talk) 14:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

PD-old-assumed?

File:Edouard Pinaud, Ed. Pinaud.jpg looks more like an advertisement incorporating a colorized/sepia public domain image of Édouard Pinaud who died in 1868. The source cited is "France, Digital Crown Holdings Limited" and there's also a link to www.ed-pinaud.com. It's not clear what the 2009 date given in the file's non-free use rationale is for, but it might be the publication date of this particular advertisement/image. A Google image search of this the photo found this unclorized version on Facebook, a colorized/sepia version without the text in this 2016 blog post and another version of the same image in this 2009 blog post. It seems that the black-and-white version of the photo should be {{PD-old-assumed}} given the date it was likely taken, but I'm wondering what others might think. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment; replace with the black & white version and tag PD-old-assumed. He died over 150 years ago. Stifle (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Copyright status of 1931 image whose author is unknown

Is this image eligible for copyright? Huh?uninspired!V2 (talk) 09:21, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

It is quite likely to be free of copyright, but some background to its original publication would help confirm that. If it turns out to be an advertisement in a US trade magazine, say, it would be PD for lack of a copyright notice. Felix QW (talk) 09:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

File:Scars Upon My Heart advertisement.jpg

Given that File:Scars Upon My Heart advertisement.jpg is nothing but factual information expressed as simple text, which is usually not considered eligible for copyright protection, it seems that this advertisement doesn't need to be treated as non-free. Since it's from the UK, though, it might not be something acceptable to move to Commons per c:COM:UK, but it should be OK to relicense as {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} for local use on Wikipedia. Any reason why this should remain non-free? If it does need to remain non-free, then I don't think it's use meet WP:FREER and WP:NFC#CS. Finally, regardless of the file's copyright status, there might be an issue with MOS:TEXTASIMAGES since it essentially is an image of what's written in Scars Upon My Heart#Adaptations. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I would agree with your assessment, PD in US only. Stifle (talk) 10:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Warranty on old knife sleeve

I have an old Quikut knife with the blade still in its cardboard sleeve, which has a lifetime warranty printed on it. I recall my family bought it in the 1970s.

I took a picture of the knife blade next to the sleeve. The warranty verbiage is similar to this, although my version says in big capital letters that the warranty is valid "EVEN IF THE DAMAGE IS YOUR FAULT". I'd like to add my photo to the Ginsu article, which discusses the Quikut brand extensively.

Would this be a non-free image? Is this warranty text copyrighted? If so, the low resolution required would wash out the text, so it may not be worth uploading. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

{{PD-text}}, also {{Useful-object-US}}, also de minimis. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 19:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Bot keeps reverting changes

The bot JJMC89 bot keeps reverting changes. How do I disable the bot on a wiki page? It seems to ignore reverts of its changes. Ergzay (talk) 11:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ergzay Examples please? If you're specifically talking about image removals, the bot is normally pretty good and the main reason it removes images is that they are non-free images lacking a rationale for the article they had been added to. Nthep (talk) 19:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Ergzay. Are you asking about the bots edits to the article "List of tallest statues"? If you are, then the bot seems to be doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing. The bot explained why it removed File:Ushiku.jpg from the article in the edit summary it left. Did you see the edit summary and click on the link included in it? Non-free content is bascially required to have two things for it to be OK to use in a Wikipedia article: (1) a non-free copyright license and (2) a separate specific non-free use rationale for each use. Although a single copyright license is usually sufficient in most cases regardless of how many times a non-free files is being used, a seperate non-free use rationale is required to be added to the file's page for each of its different uses because not all uses of a file may be considered compliant with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. You added the Ushiku image to the list article about statues, but you didn't add a corresponding non-free use rationale for that particular use to the file's page; so, the bot did what it's been tasked to do and removed the file. If you want to stop the bot from removing the file, you or someone else will need to add the required rationale for that use to the file's page. However, adding a rationale is WP:JUSTONE of the criteria that need to be satisfied for a non-free use to be valid; so, adding the rationale doesn't automatically mean the file's non-free use will still not be challenged or removed.

Finally, your edit here isn't really accurate in terms of Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. Generally, in cases like this, non-free images aren't considered OK to illustrate individual entries in list articles or in tables for the reasons given in WP:NFLISTS, WP:NFTABLES and item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI. Since an image of the statue can be seen in Ushiku Daibutsu, adding the same file to the list article is considered to not really be needed per non-free content use criterion #3 (WP:NFC#Meeting the minimal usage criterion) and the free alternative of linking to the statue's article is considered sufficient per non-free content use criterion #1 (WP:FREER). Of course, none of that has to do with why the bot removed the file since the bot is unable to make such assessments, but it's generally what's considered to be the consensus regarding this type of non-free use. You can disagree with this assessment, add the missing rationale to the file's page and then re-add the file to the article if feel is somehow different and should be separately discussed. Doing so, as mentioned above, will stop the bot, but I don't think you'll be able to establish a consensus for this file's use in that particular article at WP:FFD and stop file from eventually be removed again by a Wikipedia administrator. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Separate question but apparently related to the same bot

No. Even the image has a rationale for the page used, it still removes. I also got this userbox's emblem removed without asking me. I've read the revision summary that the bot left and it said removed NFCC violations. At that time I was so confused that I thought the bot is attempting to thwart my contributions away like a trash. It skips the rationale and removes without notice, like this userbox. Kys5g ^talk! 03:29, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

You still have not stated exactly what image and what article this happened at. Its hard to answer your question when you don't provide any details. -- Whpq (talk) 04:03, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Now enough? Kys5g ^talk! 04:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I misread and confused you with the original editor posting the question. In your case, the usage fails WP:NFCC#9. Nonfree content is allowed only in articles. A template or userbox is not an article. -- Whpq (talk) 04:48, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Kys5g. There's some guidance on this at WP:UBX#Caution about image use and WP:UP#Non-free files. You might also want to look at WP:UOWN as to why neither permission nor a warning needs to be given for clear violations of Wikipedia policy in the user namespace. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Sample of a 92 second song

I am working on creating a sample for my draft of User:TonyTheTiger/sandbox/Go New York Go. The original 1994 version of the song is 92 seconds. I imagine that I am limited to less than the usual 30 seconds for a sample but I am not sure what the sampling limits are for such a short song.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

• Also, can an article have both a link to the youtube video of the song and a 15 or 16 second sample.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)