Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 September 12
September 12
procedural move from "speedy" for more input... speedy template stated: "Available on various web pages on the internet" (claimed to be a work of the Indian government, but only texts of laws, judicial opinions, and other government reports are free from copyright per the Indian Copyright Act of 1957, Chapter V, Section 25)." Ergo, no source to prove (c) claim Skier Dude (talk) 01:16, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
- A lot of Indian images have the text This image is a work of an Indian Government employee, taken or made during the course of the person's official duties. As a work of the India Government, the image is in the public domain. which is actually not true the Indian Right to Information Act gives free access to government data but nothing in the act says it can then be re-used for anything for example commercial activities. In the public domain means it is available to the public not to do with what they want. So it really needs a fair use rationale at least. MilborneOne (talk) 14:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Album cover for Mnemonic (band) - highly unlikely uploader is (c) holder; no WP:OTRS permission provided Skier Dude (talk) 01:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC) Uploader IS the copyright owner and also a member of the band which is the subject of the Wikipedia article and permission has been therefore granted for the photo to be released into public domain.
Album cover for Mnemonic (band) - highly unlikely uploader is (c) holder; no WP:OTRS permission provided Skier Dude (talk) 01:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC) Uploader IS the copyright owner and also a member of the band which is the subject of the Wikipedia article and permission has been therefore granted for the photo to be released into public domain.
Album cover for Mnemonic (band) - highly unlikely uploader is (c) holder; no WP:OTRS permission provided - no license provided Skier Dude (talk) 01:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC) Uploader IS the copyright owner and also a member of the band which is the subject of the Wikipedia article and permission has been therefore granted for the photo to be released into public domain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evilpet (talk • contribs) 22:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
User states he took this picture along with pictures of 50 other senators. Very unlikely. warrior4321 17:07, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
- Why is this very unlikely?--72.255.2.0 (talk) 04:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
- A Wikipedian has taken images of more than fifty senators? It is very unlikely. It is very hard to believe. As well, the user has had many other problems concerning image copyrights. warrior4321 22:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
- So, in other words, this your hunch, you have nothing concrete to back it up?--72.255.2.0 (talk) 01:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Can I go around posting pictures on Wikipedia of celebrities stating that I took them? It's highly unlikely. Celebrities are not waiting in line for this Wikipedian to take photos of them. warrior4321 01:25, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- So, you know who took the picture?--72.255.2.0 (talk) 01:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- I am concerned because this photo appears on two other websites here and here. The second of which carries a page copyright of "Copyright 2009, Discovery Media". Can the contributor explain these others appearances of this photo? Tiggerjay (talk) 04:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- It's really pretty simple, I took this picture, uploaded it and released any copyright claims. Neither I nor wikipedia, apparently stop other people from using images posted on wikipedia.--1MSU-LAX •talk• 02:38, 15 September 2009 (UTC)