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)

I couldn't find the copyright policy for this website

I am willing to write an article about symbolism of animals and I found this Symbolism Dictionary but I couldn't find the copyright policy for it. I found this on the credits page People who contribute to the pages are more active crew members, but even lurkers are part of the people who make these pages possible and desirable. and I am wondering if it means that it's under the Creative Common license. The★Super★ninja2 (talk) 23:06, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

It's only Creative Commons if it explicitly says so, or uses one of the Creative Commons symbols. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 23:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Image question

I innocently made an edit here: [1] on the article page Two Fat Ladies. I thought because one subject was represented with the image from their page: Clarissa Dickson Wright within the article, that the other subject: Jennifer Paterson could as well. I am confused as to why it was removed: [2]. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 21:41, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Maineartists. It's not really a question of guilt or innocence, but rather whether the file's use in Two Fat Ladies satisfies all ten non-free content use criteria listed here. The bot left an edit summary when it removed the file. The edit summary contains a link to WP:NFC#Implemenation. Did you try looking at that page? Bascially, the bot removed the file because it lacked a separate and specific non-free use rationale for the file's use in the article; in other words, the bot removed the file because its use in the article didn't comply with non-free content use criterion #10c. So, adding the missing rationale to the file's page will stop the bot. However, there are other issues with the file's use in that article that probably can't be overcome by simply adding a rationale as explained here. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy does often allow non-free images of deceased individuals to be uploaded and used, but this usually only when the image is used for primary identification purposes in a stand-alone article about the individual in question; so, this is why the file's use in Jennifer Paterson is allowed. Trying to use the same file in other articles or in other ways tends to be much harder to justify because relevant policy encourages us to try a keep non-free use as minimal as possible. While it might seem odd that there's a photo of Wright used in the article but not a photo of Paterson, that primarily has to do with how each file is licensed. The Wright photo is a photo from Commons that has been released by its copyright holder under a free license that Wikipedia accepts; so, its use isn't subject to the same restrictions the non-free Paterson photo. There's no requirement that a photo of either Wright or Paterson be used in the "Two Fat Ladies" article per se; for sure, having some would be nice, but it needs to be done in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If you disagree with what I posted, then you can see if you can establish a consensus for the use of the Wright photo in the "Two Fat Ladies" article by starting a discussion about it at WP:FFD. I think it's going to be kind of hard to do such a thing, but others might feel differently and agree that it's OK to use. I'm just going to ping JJMC89 to this discussion since they're the Wikipedia administrator that operates the bot that removed the file and they might be able to correct or further clarify what I've posted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:41, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Is this image acceptable?

I thought I'd take a stab at uploading an image, this one, but it doesn't have "information on its copyright and licensing status". I found the image on this website, what do I put if the image is even allowed? I'm seeing many other websites using images from the website. Roundish ⋆tc) 21:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@Roundish: If an image does not have a stated copyright status, it is assumed to be nonfree and a fair-use rationale must be provided. – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 21:47, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I have added a non-free usage rationale to the file's description page. – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 21:55, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Non-free images in Charles Herbert possibly PD-US-not renewed

File:CharlesHerbert2.jpg and File:Houseboat (film) promotional photo.jpg are two non-free PR photos being used in Charles Herbert. Neither image satisfies (at least in my opinion) WP:FREER or WP:NFCC#8 since File:Charles Herbert 1960s (cropped).jpg is a public domain image being used in the main infobox for primary identification purposes and the photos themselves aren't really the subject of any sourced critical commentary anywhere in the article. Herbert, for sure, did appear in both films and may have felt Houseboat (film) was his favorite, but the reader doesn't need to see a non-free cast photo to understand such a thing. As for the The Fly (1958 film) photo, Herbert might have been in the climatic scene but that's not really enough on it's own to justify a non-free image per WP:CLIMAX. For sure, others might feel differently about each file's non-free use, but I'm wondering whether they really even needed to be licensed non-free in the first place. The description for each file states the files are from 1958 and their copyrights are owned by the movie studios that released the films. Perhaps it possible that these can actually be relicensed as {{PD-US-not renewed}} and I'm wondering if any can check on that or knows how to check on that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:29, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

The University of Pennsylvania has a useful FAQ on searching for copyright renewals: How Can I Tell Whether a Copyright Was Renewed? (In particular, "It's also possible to do a search yourself of the copyright records. For 1978 onward, they're online at the Copyright Office, and below I'll describe how you can search their online records. Copyright records from prior years are now also online in page image form (and sometimes in more convenient form as well).") It's easiest if you know the exact author or title name but I have found keyword searches to be helpful in many cases. UPenn also offers a good caveat: "If you're checking for the absence of a record, you should do the search in a number of ways to be sure; go through the lists produced by title and author searches, and try a keyword search as well just to be safe." I am of the opinion that a good faith online search for post-1978 renewals should be sufficient to change a tag but I am not aware if there is any policy or other guidance on this. 68.189.242.116 (talk) 21:14, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Policy on (dealing with) pirated content

Hello! I'd like to know more about Wikipedia's policies on properly reverting links to piracy, as in this edit, which adds a link to pirating content. As I understand it, the course of action is revert → warn editor → done, but I'm pretty new and would like to know for sure. Thanks! ReadItAlready (talk) 02:36, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi ReadItAlready. External link usage on Wikipedia is covered under WP:EL and the noticeboard for that is WP:ELN; however, external links to content deemed to be a copyright violation are not allowed per WP:COPYLINK (see also WP:ELNEVER). Since you've already removed the link, perhaps there's nothing more to do here; for future reference, though, it would've probably been a good idea to leave more of an edit summary explaining why you did so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

The only exclusion we allow for links to sites that routinely host pirated material is when that is the homepage link of a site with standalone notability (eg like Pirate Bay). Otherwise absolutely avoid linking to such sites. Masem (t) 03:27, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the information Marchjuly and Masem! I'll keep it in mind in the future. ReadItAlready (talk) 02:05, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Claude Johnson.JPG

File:Claude Johnson.JPG is sourced to a book published in 2000, but the subject of the photo Claude Johnson died in 1926. When this photo was uploaded in 2012, it was still most like protected by copyright under US copyright law because back then only images taken prior to January 1, 2017, would have been {{PD-US}} at that time and Johnsone would've still been living. However, the current brightline for "PD-US" is now January 1, 1928, and Johnson was already dead at that time. Of course, the date of first publication matters, but it seems as if there's a reasonably good chance that this could now be PD and was published well before that 2000 book, or that there are other images of Johnson which can be clearly shown to be PD. Anyone have any opinions on whether this needs to remain non-free? -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:44, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography knows of two portraits of Claude Johnson, credited to Rolls-Royce Motor Cars, Crewe and Rolls-Royce Ltd. respectively.

One of these portraits is available at high resolution from the Rolls-Royce Press Club, but unfortunately there is very little image available their regarding that image either. Felix QW (talk) 20:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Bangladesh national football team logo.png

I have given the needed rationale and licensing tag in Bangladesh national football team logo.png as like logos usually need but still I received a notice stating that it does not meet the non-free criteria. What Can I do for keeping it on wikipedia and using it on the related articles? Diptadg17 (talk) 12:51, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Diptadg17. Did you see the post that a Wikipedia administrator named Whpq left about this at Talk:Bangladesh national football team#Badge / Logo? File:Bangladesh national football team logo.png that you uploaded in essentially the same as File:Bangladesh Football Federation.svg (there are some minor differences but its pretty much the same file) and the non-free use of the svg file was previously discussed at WP:FFD and the consensus established was that the file's use is only OK in Bangladesh Football Federation and not in the individual team articles. There was also some discussion about this at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive348#JJMC89 bot deleted the Bangladesh Football Federation logo from their National Team pages (both men & women) . -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:31, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I want to start another discussion regarding the file for preventing it's deletation. Where and how I can do it? Diptadg17 (talk) 14:16, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

If you disagree with the tagging of the file for speedy deletion, you can follow the instructions given in the template and explain why on the file's talk page. Files tagged for speedy deletion are always reviewed by a Wikipedia administrator and the administrator may decide, based on what you posted, that the matter should be discussed further. If that happens, then a discussion about the file's non-free use will most likely take place at WP:FFD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:36, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Thumbnail 1490.png ‎

I have a couple of problems. One is I somehow uploaded the wrong image. I don't want it to say "Listen live".

The other, more important problem is that I looked for the option to declare it fair use as a logo and there wasn't one. In the past I have been blocked from uploading until I got everything right.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:34, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: If you uploaded the wrong image, you can (1) request that the wrong image be deleted per WP:G7 and then upload the correct image as a separate file, or (2) upload an updated version of the current image using "Upload a new version of this file" found in the "File history" section on the file's page. Method #1 is generally better when the incorrect and correct images are in different file formats or they are very different from one another; Method #2 tends to work better when the images are in the same format and there are only minor differences (e.g. slight changes in coloring, straightening, minor trimming) and the images are pretty much otherwise essentilly the same. Currently, the file in question is lacking a copyright license and has been tagged for speedy deletion per WP:F6; if you do nothing, the file will eventually be deleted unless someone else comes along and tries to fix it.

US radio station logos generally should be uploaded as non-free content unless they so simple that they fall below the US copyright law's threshold of originality and are considered to be within the public domain. Non-free logos generally should be licensed using {{Non-free logo}} with a corresponding non-free use rationale provided for each use using {{Non-free use rationale logo}}; Public domain logos generally are licensed using {{PD-logo}} with information about the file's provenance provided using {{Information}}. If you're not sure whether a logo is too simple to be eligible for copyright protection, it's perhaps best to err on the side of caution and upload in as non-free content; the licensing can always be changed later if necessary. One thing about all this is you need be fairly sure of the logo's provenance because copyright laws vary from country to country and the threshold of originality for one country may be quite difference from that of another country.

Please note that if you want to upload a logo to Commons, it will need to be "PD-logo" in both the US (where the Commons servers are located) and the country of first publication; this is because Commons files are "global files" that can be used by all WMF projects. Files uploaded to English Wikipedia, on the other hand, are "local files" and can only be used on English Wikipedia; therefore, PD-logo files uploaded to English Wikipedia only need to be public domain under US copyright law because one again that's where the Commons servers are located. If possible, it's better to upload PD-logo files to Commons because it makes them much easier for other WMF projects to use. You're not required to do so, but often local files are tagged to be moved to Commons when it's OK to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't know how to upload the correct file. I got an error message when I tried and I was at a library, so the correct file was there and does not exist on my computer. All I need is for someone to take the file that is there now and remove "Listen live". I don't know how to add the non-free use rationale or anything else to indicate it is non-free because I wasn't given that option before and I don't know how to add it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:31, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

It seems you were able to figure out how to add {{Non-free logo}} as a copyright license. Now, all you need to do is go to {{Non-free use rationale logo}}, follow the instructions given on the template's page, and then copy-and-past its syntax onto the file's page (just like you did for the "non-free logo" license). One big difference is the you will need to fill in at least the mandatory fields for rationale template's parameters yourself, but there's guidance on how to do so given on the template's page. As for the removing the "Listen live", either a completely new file or an update version of the current file will need to be uploaded. Generally, the way this is done is find the file online, download a file to your computer and then upload the file from your computer to Wikipedia. However, it sounds like you might've used a "shared computer" that you no longer have access to. If you're unable to download the file to any other computer, then you can ask someone else to do it for you at WP:FFU. Just follow the instructions given on that page. One last thing is that if all of the official websites of the station show its logo with "Listen live", then it shouldn't really be removed since that's the way the station has chosen to brand itself. If other websites that don't belong to the station are removing that part from the station's logo, then they have done so for their own reasons that most likely have nothing to do with the station. Wikipedia should really use the logo that the station itself is using and not the logo that someone else thinks it should be using. Is this is the Facebook page of the station? If it is, then it's showing a pretty different logo. Is that the logo you want to upload? If it is, just make a request at WP:FFU and someone will do it for you as long as it's OK to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure what to do with that second template but this is where I got the logo. The Facebook page apparently has an outdated logo. However, I don't think "Listen live" is intended to be part of the logo.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:48, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I found a function on my computer that allows me to upload the correct logo, but WP:FFU is not letting me do it. It's asking me all sorts of questions that are impossible to answer. I don't see a way to ask someone to do it either.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, "upload new version" worked, after I discovered what was missing from the template.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean the questions at Wikipedia:Files for upload/Wizard? The first four are really two questions having four permutations of possible answers. You're definitely autoconfirmed, so really it's whether the image is free-use or not - if it is, you proceed to c:COM:Upload; if it's not, you proceed to WP:File Upload Wizard. Both of these do ask further questions, but they're kinda essential: if you ignore them, or fill them in with false information, you'll get your image deleted in pretty short order. Mostly it's to do with copyright, which both Wikipedia and Commons take very seriously. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

No one helped me with the answers to these questions, and I was never allowed to upload. The box could not be clicked on. Fortunately, I had already used another method to upload the previous version and all I had to do was add the templates I was told to above.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Charles Sheeler

Hi, IMO File:Connecticut Barns SAAM-1985.8.29 1.jpg license is wrong. It might be PD for lack of notice or renewal, but I doubt it is a work by a US governement employee. There are other paintings with also a doubtful copyright status on Commons. If the license could be fixed with some evidence, they could be added to this page. See c:COM:VPC#Artworks by Charles Sheeler for the list. Thanks for your opinion. Yann (talk) 21:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

This Smithsonian page appears to indicate that this particular 1934 painting was part of the Public Works of Art Project when Sheeler would have been an employee of the US government. 68.189.242.116 (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

That was not very clear to me, but then OK if this is sufficient evidence. Yann (talk) 23:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I did a little more digging to see if i could find more documentation and found a helpful and interesting Washington Post article from 1983: GSA Finds Lost Sheeler Canvas ("The painting, 'Connecticut Barns,' about 32 by 34 inches, cost the United States government $221.85, Sheeler's pay in the Public Works Art Project, a Depression program.... Sheeler signed the painting on the front. The frame carries a brass plaque on the front and a label on the back identifying it as being a Public Works Art Project product.") 68.189.242.116 (talk) 19:58, 13 January 2023 (UTC)