Commons:Help desk

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓

Community Portal

Village Pump (copyright & proposals)

Help Desk (Upload help)

Administrators' Noticeboard (vandalism, user problems, blocks and protections)

Graphics Lab

Wikimedia Commons help desk in other languages: Shortcut COM:HD Alemannisch | العربية | asturianu | Boarisch | български | català | česky | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | kа | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | македонски | मराठी | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | occitan | polski | português | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | suomi | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | 中文 | Zazaki | +/− Deutsch: Diese Seite ist ein Forum für neue Benutzer der Commons. Hier darfst du jede Frage in der Sprache stellen, die du bevorzugst. Wenn du schnellere Hilfe benötigst, besuche bitte den Live-Chat-Raum #wikimedia-commons im IRC! Am einfachsten geht dies mit dem Webchat. English: This page is a forum for new users on Commons. Feel free to ask any question in any language you like. For quicker help please refer to the live chat room #wikimedia-commons on IRC! For quick access, you may use this link. Español: Esta página es un foro para los nuevos usuarios de Commons. Siéntete libre de preguntar cualquier cosa en el idioma que prefieras. Para una ayuda más rápida, por favor pasa por el canal de charla en vivo #wikimedia-commons en el IRC. Puedes entrar aquí. Français: Cette page est un forum pour les utilisateurs novices sur Commons. N'hésitez pas à poser vos questions dans votre langue préférée. Pour une aide plus interactive, pensez à visiter le canal de discussion #wikimedia-commons sur IRC. Galego: Esta páxina é un foro para os novos usuarios de Commons. Síntete libre de preguntar calquera cousa no idioma que prefiras. Para unha axuda máis rápida, por favor, pasa pola canle de charla en directo #wikimedia-commons no IRC! Podes entrar seguindo esta ligazón. Italiano: Questa pagina è un forum per i nuovi utenti di Commons. Sentiti libero di porre qualsiasi domanda in qualsiasi lingua preferisci. Per un aiuto urgente per favore entra nella chat room live #wikimedia-commons in IRC! Polski: Ta strona jest miejscem dyskusji dla nowych użytkowników Commons. Możesz zadać dowolne pytanie w dowolnym języku. Jeżeli zależy ci na szybkiej odpowiedzi wejdź na kanał #wikimedia-commons w sieci IRC! Jeśli nie znasz angielskiego, wejdź na polskojęzyczną stronę, gdzie też możesz uzyskać pomoc. Português: Está página é um fórum para novos usuários no Commons. Sinta-se livre para fazer qualquer pergunta em qualquer idioma que preferir. Para ajuda rápida, por favor usar o canal de chat ao vivo #wikimedia-commons e no IRC. Svenska: Om du vill ställa nybörjarfrågor på svenska, är du välkommen till den svenskspråkiga Bybrunnen här på Wikimedia Commons eller att tjatta på IRC-kanalen #wikipedia-sv. Македонски: Оваа страница е форум за нови корисници на Ризницата (Commons). Слободно поставете било какво прашање на било кој јазик. За да добиете помош во живо, обратете се на каналот #wikimedia-commons на ИРЦ! മലയാളം: കോമൺസിലെ പുതിയ ഉപയോക്താക്കൾക്ക് ഈ താൾ ഫോറം പോലെ ഉപയോഗിക്കാവുന്നതാണ്. കോമൺസിനെ സംബന്ധിച്ച ഏതൊരു ചോദ്യവും ഏതൊരു ഭാഷയിലും ചോദിക്കാവുന്നതാണ്. പെട്ടന്നുള്ള സഹായത്തിന് ഐ.ആർ.സി.യിലെ #wikimedia-commons എന്ന ചാനൽ ഉപയോഗിക്കാവുന്നതാണ്! ചാനലിലേയ്ക്ക് നേരിട്ട് പ്രവേശിക്കാൻ ഈ കണ്ണി ഉപയോഗിക്കാം. 한국어: 이 문서는 공용의 새로운 사용자들을 위한 포럼으로, 자신이 원하는 어떤 언어로든지 자유롭게 질문을 할 수 있습니다. 보다 빠르게 도움을 얻고 싶다면 IRC의 #wikimedia-commons 채팅 채널을 이용해보세요! 日本語: この頁はコモンズの新規利用者のためのフォーラムです。 何語でもかまわないのでお気軽に質問をお書きください。迅速なサポートを希望するときはIRCチャットの#wikimedia-commonsの利用もお考えください。 中文（简体）‎: 这是一个给维基共享资源新用户使用的论坛。请随意发问，用任何语言都没问题，但使用英文的话通常能获得更快的解答。另外您也可以使用中文版的互助客栈。如需快速帮助，请参阅在IRC上的实时聊天室#wikimedia-commons！如需快速访问，请使用这个链接。 中文（繁體）‎: 這是一個給維基共享資源新用戶使用的論壇。請隨意發問，用任何語言都沒問題，但使用英文的話通常能獲得更快的解答。另外您也可以使用中文版的互助客棧。如需快速幫助，請參閱在IRC上的實時聊天室#wikimedia-commons！如需快速訪問，請使用這個連結。

This help desk is a forum for questions and help on How to use Commons Anyone, from newbie to experienced, can ask a question here. Questions will be replied to here as well. Any answers you receive are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them. Please sign your question by typing four tildes (~~~~). In order to get quick answers consider the following points: For licensing and copyright issues, post at Commons:Village pump/Copyright. For proposals, post at Commons:Village pump/Proposals. For policy and technical information, post at Commons:Village pump. For administrator attention, post here, Commons:Administrators' noticeboard or directly to an administrator. For questions not related to this website, try Wikipedia:Reference desk. Have you checked the Commons:FAQ and Help:Contents? You may also find what you are looking for in the Commons:Help desk/Archives. Resolved sections (marked by {{section resolved|1=~~~~}}) will be archived after four days, sections with no discussion will be archived after ten days. Click here to ask your question about using Commons or

Important discussion pages (index)

Commons Help desk Community-wide general discussion: Village pump Village pump: Copyright Village pump: Proposals Graphics and photography: Graphics discussion Ask for image improvement Photography critiques Categories discussion Deletion requests Copyright and licensing questions OTRS noticeboard Work requests for bots Centralized discussion Contact administrators: Vandalism reports User problems Blocks and protections General (none of the above) CheckUser requests Disputes noticeboard IRC Commons mailing list archive Bugzilla: Commons (last 7 days)

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 4 days.

Image on website only 1x1px

Sometimes images on websites (for instance this) are only 1x1px when downloaded. It's strange, since they display well on the websites. Can anybody explain why that is so and whether it's possible to download a version that can be uploaded to Commons? --Jonund (talk) 20:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Use right click and select "See page source". I think you were searching for 1. --McZusatz (talk) 08:48, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Roofing Houston

I am uploading a webm movie file and the longer it says it is uploading the more the time keeps increasing instead of decreasing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edseeman (talk • contribs) 22:34, 22 March 2013‎ (UTC)

Please help to add to commons

Please can anyone help to put this picture on Commons ? This is a candidate to be copied to Wikimedia Commons, but i don´t get it how... I would like too use it on the Swedish Wiki....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Luthertombstoneunderaltar.jpg

File:Luthertombstoneunderaltar.jpg

Luther's tombstone in the Castle Church in Wittenberg.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hafspajen (talk • contribs) 10:32, 17 April 2013‎ (UTC)

Trying to upload a Megloid Transmigration musical composition pdf

I tried to load a pdf (maybe you need a jpeg) with the following text under the following category The license is described by the following wikitext (must contain a valid copyright tag): It wouldn't let me enter the text - what am I missing? Thank-you

Copyright 2013. I, Joseph Glantz, the appointed representative of Douglas Cornish and Andrei Beleuta, hereby affirm that Douglas Cornish and Andrei Beleuta are the creators and sole owners of the exclusive copyright of the image of this musical composition created through their Megloid Transmigration computer program and that the composition/image was created in April, 2013.

Douglas Cornish and Andrei Beleuta agree to publish that work under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0" (unported) and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)

Douglas Cornish and Andrei Beleuta acknowledges that by doing so they grant anyone the right to use the image in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

Douglas Cornish and Andrei Beleuta acknowledge that they are aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

Douglas Cornish and Andrei Beleuta are aware that they always retain copyright of this work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me or them..

Douglas Cornish and Andrei Beleuta and I acknowledge that we cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Joseph Glantz. joe@joeglantz.com 215.791.4988. Levittown, PA.

> I am the appointed representative of Douglas Cornish and Andrei Beleuta.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jglantz (talk • contribs) 14:57, 17 April 2013‎ (UTC)

Video được đề xuất Nhận xét

Video được đề xuất Nhận xét - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.71.26.69 (talk • contribs)

Searching for images by the date they were created?

Is there any way to search or browse for images by the date they were created or first published?

I couldn't find anything related to this in the help section.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Presuki (talk • contribs) 20:30, 4. May 2013 (UTC)

Attribution lines for printed, but modified images

I uploaded an image which is to be published in a magazine. The original image is an image of musical notation, a clef in D major. This file was in a second version converted to SVG, and I took this file SVG-file and added another cross, so it is now an image of a clef in A Major. My first question now would be: How could a reasonable printed attribution line look? I know the credit should go to the original author, but I'm confused, since on the page there would be an image that the original author didn't "produce" (D Major bmp vs. A Major svg). My second question would be: What data would my publisher need? Regards Christian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellowhenry (talk • contribs) 07:50, 5 May 2013‎ (UTC)

Very likely a musical notation this simple would be Public Domain ineligible (PD-simple). If so no attribution is needed. For this sort of thing you can credit the original saying that yours is a derivative of the other image. You can give a link to the other image. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:01, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Download got cut on big files

Hello. I'm experiencing problems trying to download big files like this one:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Van_Gogh_-_Starry_Night_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg

For some reason download stops after 2 or 3 mb. Even uding a download manager, the same situation.

I´d appreciatte any help with this issue.

BR

Martin Ruta

If you are using the upload wizard then try Special:Upload or Commons:Commonist. There are others but these are my main two.--Canoe1967 (talk) 02:37, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Try using a downloader that supports the "Range" header, like wget. (@Canoe, his problem is with DOWNloading.) Palosirkka (talk) 19:27, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:灝府千歲 Wao Royal Lords.jpg

--黃才耀 (talk) 03:09, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:灝府千歲 Wao Royal Lords.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:灝府千歲 Wao Royal Lords.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the OTRS system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. (You can get a list of all your uploaded files using the Gallery tool.) Thank you.

黃才耀 (talk) 03:09, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Well there was a misplaced license, fixed, but the source is unspecified. Did you take the photo yourself? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

uploading a photo

Hi, I'm creating a wikipedia page for author Sarah Stonich, and I'm having difficulty uploading a photo of her for the page. The page is in draft form on my account page at the moment.

I requested the photo from her and she sent it to me via email. When I followed the uploading a photo prompts, however, I wasn't able to select "upload" although I thought I had satisfactorily answered the prompts. What am I doing wrong?

Thanks, Elaine Kenny (username: lieutkenny) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lieutkenny (talk • contribs) 21:09, 7 May 2013‎ (UTC)

• There are quite a few ways to upload a photo. Could you be more specific about what you are trying to do (e.g. which upload tool you are using). Also, if a third party provided a photo, we'll need you to go through the process described at COM:OTRS (or that third party can upload the image herself). - Jmabel ! talk 05:04, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:New cpfc crest.PNG.jpg

[1] New Crystal Palace badge. Could someone please help me add the correct licencse. Please see source new crystal palace badge --Rockybiggs (talk) 08:50, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

--Rockybiggs (talk) 08:50, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I doubt that either {{PD-shape}} or {{PD-textlogo}} are applicable. The image IMHO meets the threshold of originality requirement. So, it can not be hosted on Commons without a permission. Ruslik (talk) 14:48, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I would agree with Ruslik. Palosirkka (talk) 19:20, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

hello onu

Hi my name is charle i have a question about bresil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.101.116.3 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 9 May 2013‎ (UTC)

• Probably not the right place to ask it. This is a page to ask for help using Wikimedia Commons (this site). - Jmabel ! talk 16:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Ottavio and Rosita Missoni.jpg

This file is owned by the Missoni family, Missoni spa. They would like to donate this picture in order to see it on the wikipage dedicated to Ottavio Missoni, recently deceased. It's royalty free. The picture was taken in 1984 by the photographer Giuseppe Pino.

--Lanleony (talk) 14:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

The copyright is Giuseppe Pino's. Unless we get a release of this photo under a free license from Giuseppe Pino, we'll have to remove it. ("Royalty free" is not a free license.) Lupo 09:38, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Генерал Рослый Одесса март1965.jpg

I have uploaded this photo from my family archive. (The author is unknown, date is certainly March 1965, digitized by myself.) I want to keep it on Wikimedia Commons for it is needed on a page about my grandfather. Please, help me to obey the formalities required. Thank you.

--Aliosha.en (talk) 14:27, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

The same as below. Ruslik (talk) 16:36, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear Ruslik0, This photo cannot be copyrighted. Please, give me a solution to my problem, which, I guess, should be a very frequent and typical. What should one do with family photos? Thanks. --Aliosha.en (talk) 00:09, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Please, have a look at "Copyright help regarding File:RoslyIvPav 1.JPG" --Aliosha.en (talk) 02:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Every photograph can be copyrighted, and unless we can prove for certain that it is not copyrighted or that the copyright has expired (usually 70 years after the photographer died, no matter when the photo was taken), then we assume that the copyright is valid. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I have finally understood that there is no way to post such photos. It was only yours reply, which explained this. Thank you once again, for the previous answers sounded like mockery: find the author from 1940, if he died check if he did not sign out the copyright to this particular photo to his heirs, then, according to the time passed, I would likely be directed to the heirs of heirs... -Aliosha.en (talk) 23:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome.

I know it's frustrating. Dealing with this complicated issue makes me wish for a very simple copyright system, one that says "Anything more than 100 years old is always free, all countries, all people, all works, no exceptions!" Good luck, WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:RoslyIvPav 1.JPG

I have uploaded this photo from an url (http://www.warheroes.ru/hero/hero.asp?Hero_id=1391), but I also have a similar, but worse in quality copy in my family archive. (The author is unknown, year 1940.) I want to keep it on Wikimedia Commons for it is needed on a page about my grandfather. Please, help me to obey the formalities required. Thank you.

--Aliosha.en (talk) 14:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Likely copyrighted. You need a permission from the copyright owner or his heirs. Ruslik (talk) 16:36, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear Ruslik0, Do you really think the photo of 1940, made in Soviet Union, could be copyrighted? What should I really do? Thanks. --Aliosha.en (talk) 00:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

My personal opinion: I don't understand why you question the answer that you received. Feel free to read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_Soviet_Union ? --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 01:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear everybody, I am not going to discuss the copyright laws, I am asking for help: what should I do if I take a photo from my family archive, digitize it and want to place on Wikimedia? You, experts must know the answer, finding which would take weeks for me. There is a small difference in origin between the present file and the file Генерал_Рослый_Одесса_март1965.jpg, as I explained in some detail. Please help! Saying "Find the author of the photo from 1940 or 1965" is no help! --Aliosha.en (talk) 02:18, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

The answer was already provided: get a permission from the author (copyright owner) or his heirs. Ruslik (talk) 08:52, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

As far as I could find out, the expiration time for copyright in Russia is 70 years. The photo File:RoslyIvPav 1.JPG was made in Russia in 1940. What should I do then to keep it on Wikimedia? Please, answer me in practical terms. --Aliosha.en (talk) 02:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

It is 70 years from the death of the creator, not from the day the photo was taken. The first step would be to find out when the photographer died.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:23, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I've got it: my business is hopeless. --Aliosha.en (talk) 23:38, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:OTTAVIO MISSONI.jpg

This file is owned by the Missoni family, Missoni spa. They would like to donate this picture in order to see it on the wikipage dedicated to Ottavio Missoni, recently deceased. It's royalty free. The picture was taken in 1990 by the photographer Giuseppe Pino.

--Lanleony (talk) 14:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Please, specify source and/or author. Ruslik (talk) 16:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

The copyright is Giuseppe Pino's. Unless we get a release of this photo under a free license from Giuseppe Pino, we'll have to remove it. ("Royalty free" is not a free license.) Lupo 09:40, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:زیرگذر.jpg

منبع:پورتال شهرداری تنکابن استفاده از عکس با ذکر منبع بلا مانع است. چه مطلبی ذیگر باید اضافه شود؟

--Cougar1123 (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Likely copyrighted. You need a permission from copyright owner. Ruslik (talk) 16:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Categories for scanned books

Hi! I uploaded some scanned books to Commons so that we can use them in Wikisource and I am going to upload more. But I wonder what is a proper category for them. I found several categories that may apply. For instance, for books in English: Category:Scanned English texts, Category:Scanned English books, Category:Books in English, Category:English Wikisource books. Could anybody explain what should be proper categorization? --DixonD (talk) 11:05, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

hmm i would spontaiously put that in the Wikisource English Book category. But it looks like that these cats need to be tidied up.--Sanandros (talk) 14:39, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

License/Copyright question File:Hana M Herodes a Herodias.jpg

• 

I received notification that the file can be deleted because it doesn't have a "source" or copyright information.

The photo is one of many of my mother's aunt and was scanned from mother's family album. It is dated 1937 in the album and I have no way of verifying who actually took the picture as it was taken years before I was born and my parents are both deceased and I can't ask them.

My father was a photographer and the picture is dated from about the time he met mother so one could presume he is the author but that can't be verified. I have donated other unique photos of mother's aunt to the Slovak National Library archives but chose that one as representative of her work to publish, at mother's request, before she passed away.

At the time I posted the photo I was contacted by a Slovak administrator and explained this. The editor added “Hana Melickova, z osobnej zbierky Sula Vancova, (rod. Mitrovska)” (Hana Melickova, from personal collection of Sula Vancova, (nee Mitrovska)) to clarify the source.

I would appreciate any help as to how to license it as this is the only “representative” picture of her that I have and would hate to have it being deleted just because I can't verify if father actually took the it. --Mvanco (talk) 14:03, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

As source you can state that it is your own collection. But it's more instresting when it was first published. Cause we have severel gudlines and it is eventually PD:

• Commons:Anonymous works
• {{PD-EU-no author disclosure}}
• {{Anonymous-EU}}

But if you are pretty sure that your grandfather is the photographer and copyright holder you and all the ancetors of your grandfather have to agree to publish it under a free license which you can choose from here. I would advise you to choose {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. The best would be also then afterwards to send an E-Mail with all the agreements of your ancestors to the OTRS-Team. I know that sounds very compicated but copyright and law is unfortunatly a very complicated field.--Sanandros (talk) 15:07, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the hints. Since in no way I can find out for sure who took that picture in 1937 and it is obvious I was the first one to post in anywhere since then, by scanning it from mother's family album, I will opt to go with *{{PD-EU-no author disclosure}} to honor her aunt's memory and to portray her in a picture representative of her career. I would appreciate feedback about my corrections applied to the file. Thanks --Mvanco (talk) 19:54, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think we can host this file unless you know that it was published before 1926. I am assuming this is a previously unpublished picture taken in Czechoslovakia in 1937 by an unknown author, in which case we cannot host it at Commons. There are a few of things you can do:

• If there are any pictures you do know the authorship of, then you can use one of those. For example, pictures that you know were taken by your grandfather, which his heirs own the rights to, can be released by the heirs at Commons using {{PD-heirs}}. You can do this with the pictures you donated to the Slovak National Library, as the heirs of the photographer still own the copyright.
• A photo of her anonymously published more than 70 years ago would be eligible for upload at Slovak Wikipedia (if Slovak Wikipedia allows local uploads, Czech Wikipedia doesn't)
• You can upload the picture as fair use at wikis which allow such uploads. This means that the copyright status can be ignored for illustrative purposes, as long as no other free pictures of the subject exist. (A partial list of Wikimedia projects which allow fair use is at meta:Non-free content, again, cs.wiki does not, I do not know about sk.wiki)
• Boldly assume that your grandfather is the author, and use {{PD-heirs}} on the photo, as above. However, I would not recommend this as Commons operates on a precautionary principle when it comes to copyrighted works.

There are options other than {{PD-heirs}} if you are uploading an old photo and you wish to retain the copyright for some reason, but judging by what you are saying I don't think you intend to do this. You can't use {{PD-EU-no author disclosure}}, as that is for works published in the EU more than 70 years ago. It seems as though this photo has not been published before.

Hope this is helpful in some way, sorry we can't host this file –⁠moogsi (talk) 17:05, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Correction: It was not my grandfather - My father was a photographer. I can't go on trying to prove that I have the right to publish OLD photos from the family album. I can't AFFIRM that my father took the picture. The date (1937) would indicate so but I can't be 100% sure and I don't want to play the game by posting that he was the photographer (It was taken before I was born.) I have written to the sk.wiki administrator that originally OK'd the posting asking if it can be uploaded there rather than to the Commons. By the Way, the photo was most PROBABLY published in 1937 as my grand-aunt is in full dress and makeup for the part she was playing then. It was probably used as publicity photo for the Slovak National Theater. Thanks Mvanco (talk) 02:43, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

TOC failures

I just tried three different templates on Category:Images from the Canadian Copyright Collection at the British Library to try and get an alphabetical table of contents for searching images. All failed and would not return any images. Is it because it is a hidden cat or other reasons?--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:36, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that {{Picturing Canada image}} which adds this category also adds a sort key based on photograph id number. Every image in this category is sorted between 1 and 9; if you add a table of contents and select "C", it will not find any images with this sort key. For example File:Dorothy (HS85-10-11625) original.tif is sorted at 11625, not in D. MKFI (talk) 16:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I will see if the uploader has a reason to sort by number.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Why you people delete my pictures/Images ?

I never violated any Copyright and never do it in future but you people are deleting all my pictures saying that I violated copyright . Does any one complained to you people about my pictures ? . I am uploading pictures which I have taken personally or pictures of free sites. Some of pictures are not new and i have uploaded them to many sites . Please understand , I am not violating any copyright. This is crazy , when I am uploading images taken by my camera are removed by stating that i violated copyrights. If you people don't want us to upload pictures just say that but removing our pictures on name of copyrights is non sense . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunnieee (talk • contribs) 19:02, 11 May 2013‎ (UTC)

The ones you take with your camera should be ok. The ones you find on the net probably have copyright for 50 to 120 years depending. For pictures you take see: Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:59, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Pay attention to the notices left on your talk page:

File:Actor Nani.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here.

The text is different depending on the language you view it in, but the bold part is important. Most things you find on the internet are copyrighted by the creator. The file mentioned above, for example, is found uncropped here. If you took this photo, then you probably need to direct your anger at indiaglitz.com because they are stealing your work without crediting you (and somehow got hold of the original uncropped version of the photo). Do you have the original photo as it came from your camera? Without the watermarks? –⁠moogsi (blah) 21:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Генерал Рослый Одесса март1965.jpg

? --158.255.179.140 02:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I assume you query is about the tag that has been applied to the above image? If so, please note that all images uploaded here must state a source, and there must be sufficient information to prove that the picture is freely licensed by the photographer or is in the public domain. If that's not done, the picture will eventually be deleted. If you need specific help, please post a query here. Regards, --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:31, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

This is quite a nice high resolution scan from a printed document, probably a book (looking at the marks left from the printing process), which has been immediately included in the Russian article on Lieutenant-General Ivan Pavlovich. As the photograph was taken in 1965, there is quite a high probability that any copyright that applied then, has yet to expire. The Precautionary principle (a policy) applies in these cases. --Fæ (talk) 11:02, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Permission of people depicted

If I take a photograph of someone I am clearly the copyright owner so can presumably upload it to Wikimedia Commons. But I seem to recall from somewhere that I ought also to have the permission of the person(s) depicted. Certainly when using photographs for publicity purposes for other organisations I've been required to get the models to sign a release form. What's the situation with the Commons in this respect? If it makes a difference, I'm resident in the United Kingdom. --Ross Burgess (talk) 11:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Please see COM:PEOPLE. In the UK, you should be OK if you have taken a photo of a person in a public place, where there is no expectation of privacy. The UK is easier in that respect than some other countries. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 12:00, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Classic marginal examples are someone notable speaking at an event open to the public would have no expectation of privacy, even if the location were not a "public" place and even if members of the public needed a ticket, but someone notable sitting in an outdoor cafe eating a pile of pie and mash, might be considered to have an expectation of privacy, and not expect to be photographed by someone walking by on the street using a zoom lens. In the latter case, if you shouted "Hi Elvis!" at the notable person, and they smiled or waved back with their fork as you took the photo, one might reasonably assume that there was a form of tacit consent; certainly no judge would be likely to consider that photograph intrusive given a demonstrable rationale/context of consent. --Fæ (talk) 12:45, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I created File:Visual consent image.jpg to make it a little easier to show consent. This may be better than OTRS which has a backlog and should be accepted by the community as a form of consent.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:12, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Problem with my gallery

When I want to see my gallery I get a message like this:

Database Error: User 'daniel_www' has exceeded the 'max_user_connections' resource (current value: 15) on sql-s4/commonswiki_p Fatal error: Call to a member function addQuotes() on a non-object in /home/daniel/public_html/WikiSense-live/web/common/WikiQuery.php on line 940

Could someone tell me what I should do to get it fixed? Thank you for your help Dinkum (talk) 16:00, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

It looks like a temporary problem. I can see your uploads okay on this page. What tool or special page are you using? By the way, you could always consider having a user upload category, similar to mine, which then does not rely on special queries. --Fæ (talk) 16:13, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

He's using Duesentrieb's wikisense on Toolserver. Evidence: daniel_www. You may use Gallery tool (which requires JavaScript enabled and a modern browser) instead. You can't fix the issue; Toolserver has technical problems with its Solaris servers. -- Rillke^(q?) 16:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

MY photo which *I* took has been deleted.

Greetings,

My photo of William G. Swank has been deleted.

Here is the photo: http://blog.hisnameistimmy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/William_G_Swank.jpg

I TOOK this damn photo. And I took it with the subject's permission (which I DO NOT NEED to post a photo here).

Since I took the photo, it has become his official photo for newspapers, articles, the dust jackets on his books; it's fine for everyone but WikiCommons.

WHAT GIVES? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Timwayne (talk • contribs) 16:51, 12 May 2013‎ (UTC)

For clarity, the image in question is File:William G Swank.jpg, which was deleted on 17 October 2011 by Courcelles, having been tagged as lacking permission 8 days previous.

Tim,

I'm very sorry this has happened, but I hope that you can understand the reason it was deleted: when something is a publicity photo, we tend to assume that the copyright rests with the author, and further tend to assume that that author is not the uploader - we get so many photos of celebrities which are clearly promotional works but are claimed as own work by anonymous accounts, and 99.99% of those will be simple copyright violations - people falsely claiming others' work as their own. We try and avoid this happening, and so when we see such a work we ask for more evidence of authorship, as we did in this case. You contacted MissVain, the person who originally tagged the file, who informed you that the file description actually states that the license is Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0), and then you have CC-BY-SA listed as well. Your Flickr account also states it is CC BY-NC-ND 3.0. It also appears as if you took the photograph, but I guess you did not? We need the direct website link to where the image came from.

While we do not disallow a mix of free and unfree licensing, it does tend to make us suspicious, especially when the given source states it is not free (in no uncertain terms). The simplest way to resolve this would be for you to simply relicense it on flickr to CC-BY-SA - that way there's no ambiguity about licence. Alternatively you can contact our OTRS team.

We take your copyright seriously - there's nothing to stop a random person having signed up with the name Tim Wayne in order to claim that they have the rights to the photo. We deleted it because we wanted to make sure we weren't infringing copyright. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:20, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

1927~1927年の論文

ヘルプデスク御中

最近入手した昭和初期の音楽研究家（祖父）の論文をアップしようと思っています。入手を手伝ってくれた大阪大学の図書館の方からは以下のコメントを頂いています。 『論文なので譲渡していない限り、通常は著作権は著者にあるはずです。ただし、Webにあげるには著作権の一種である公衆送信権も必要ですが、いずれも保護期間を超えています。公表後50年、死後50年　いずれも経っていますので、許諾を得る必要はないかと思います。』

アップしても問題無いでしょうか？

--Migikura (talk) 01:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, use {{PD-Japan-oldphoto}} –⁠moogsi (talk) 17:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Photograph I took of a commemorative plaque in public place ? copyright

I took a photo of Plaque on Stratford Broadway in London UK that commemorates Gerard Manley Hopkins' birth and early life in Stratford, including part of his poem 'The Wreck of the Deutschland'. Would there be a problem uploading this to Commons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krebiozen (talk • contribs) 15:28, 13 May 2013‎ (UTC)

Most likely that would not be allowed. Assuming that the plaque has some textual or artistic copyright in itself (and most do) we would need the copyright owner's permission. In the UK the level of originality needed for copyright to subsist is very small. The fact that the plaque is displayed in public does not help, unfortunately. Sorry. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the specific case, because it depends on the exact details, but I don't believe that a plaque normally counts under the otherwise Commons-friendly Commons:Freedom of panorama#United Kingdom rules. They want a "work of artistic craftsmanship", which doesn't include "graphic works" like most posters and signs. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Protest signs with photos of unknown copyright status

I have a various photos taken at public protests in the United States of people holding signs with one or more photos whose origin and copyright is unknown; all have some sort of hand written or printed text on or about them making it clear they are protest signs. Can my photos of these signs be used here? (I see others have been put up on commons. Mine are likely to be challenged on some articles where I might want to use them, so at least I can cover the copyright base in advance.) Thanks. Carolmooredc (talk) 18:28, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

• A bit of a gray zone, but in general for contemporary US photos (since the US adopted the Berne Convention), if the sign raises to the level of originality to be copyrightable, and the photo is primarily or exclusively of the sign, we'd need permission from the person who designed the sign. Conversely: (1) if the sign is just a small amount of uncopyrightable text (e.g. "No War" or "No new taxes") written in a manner that did not rise to the level of significant graphic design, then there would be no copyright issue (2) if the sign was primarily of a person and they happen to be carrying a sign, that's probably OK on a de minimis basis, much like the person's clothes. - Jmabel ! talk 01:05, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Of course, in real life people at political protests (as opposed perhaps to commercial artist protests, for example) usually want their signs to be photographed to get their message out. In any case, it seems if there is a proper mix of photo of unknown copyright status, non-remarkable text and person carrying sign it should not be a problem. Or is the photo always a problem unless one can prove it's copyright status OK?? Carolmooredc (talk) 02:37, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The problem is, there's a line between "want their signs to be photographed to get their message out" and "are willing to license under a Free license". I think if a corporation used their sign in advertising to make the point of how loony their objectors were, many protesters would turn to any source, including copyright, to stop that, even though a Free license must be permissible to use like that. Free licenses are hard masters; I know there are uses of my photos on Commons where the user had better cross their i's and dot their t's as per the license requirements, because I would be looking for a justification to force them to stop using it. We can't assume that other people have accepted the limitations of a free license.--Prosfilaes (talk) 11:35, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

A photograph of a protest sign that itself contains a photograph of unknown origin is inherently problematic. If your photograph depicts a whole bunch of said signs, then the photos on the signs are probably de minimis. But if it's a photograph of one sign that shows a photograph, it's a derivative work and not allowed here. Powers (talk) 15:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Are these "pictures of signs" or "pictures of people holding signs"? Something like File:Halloween92McGovern.jpg is probably fine, even if the sign itself contains copyrighted works. Something like File:Head poster Garden District.JPG is probably not okay if the sign contains copyrighted works. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Like the former. Lots of background. Thanks. Carolmooredc (talk) 16:45, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Head poster Garden District.JPG is actully okay if tagged with Template:PD-text. You can't copyright simple signs.--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:59, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I thought that might be getting into extreme pro-copyright territory (or whatever the funny en.wikipedia userbox I saw last night said). Thanks. Carolmooredc (talk) 17:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I have found that many at en:wp don't know copyright as well as commons. I have seem them actually delete many public domain images that are used as fair use there. One recent one is File:Nighthawks by Edward Hopper 1942.jpg which I came across over there. After a discussion at Commons:Village pump/Copyright I decided to upload it. With the very helpful research by others here it will probably survive deletion. Commons:Village pump/Copyright may be your best forum for copyright in the future. We are not without drama with copyrights as you can see with Commons:Deletion requests/File:NewarkJustice1.jpg which was also kept after a bit of drama. Template:Commons policies and guidelines has more details in the copyright sections than en:wp does.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:23, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Royal Greenland

Hello my name is Shane and I'm from England .could I request an application form please for possible vacancies on board the royal Greenland .thankyou —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.78.81.2 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 13 May 2013‎ (UTC)

• I'm not sure where you intended to post this, but you've posted it to the help desk for the site http://commons.wikimedia.org (for people with difficulties using the site). No one here is likely to be able to help you with this question. - Jmabel ! talk 00:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Neue Version einer GIF-Datei hochgeladen, es wird aber weiterhin die alte Version in der Dateivorschau und im Wiki-Beitrag angezeigt.

Hallo, ich habe eine neue Version der Datei http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ZyklischerBlattumlauf.gif hochgeladen. In den Ansicht Dateiversionen wird auch die richtige Datei (Rotorblattanstellungen unter über der Erklärung) angezeigt. In der großen Vorschau und im Wiki-Beitrag ist aber weiterhin die alte Version zu sehen. Ich habe die Aktualisierung der Datei ein zweitesmal probiert. Das Ergebnis ist allerdings unverändert. Was ist hier falsch gelaufen? Kann jemand eine Version der Dateiaktualisierung löschen?

I uploaded a new version of the file http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ZyklischerBlattumlauf.gif. Although no errors were reported, the large preview of this file and the picture within the wiki article show the old version. So I repeated the upload without any success. What went wrong? Can anyone delte one of the uploades new version?--UlrichHeither (talk) 19:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Lokales Cache-Problem, vermutlich im Browser. Bei mir wird nur die aktuelle Version angezeigt. --Denniss (talk) 20:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Please purge your browser’s cache or enable JavaScript in your Browser's settings. (You only need to do it once.)

Internet Explorer: press Ctrl+F5, Firefox: hold down ⇧ Shift while clicking Reload (or press STRG+⇧ Shift+R), Opera/Konqueror: press F5, Safari: hold down ⇧ Shift+alt while clicking Reload, Chrome: hold down ⇧ Shift while clicking Reload --McZusatz (talk) 20:23, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Danke für die schnelle Hilfe. Es lag tatsächlich an den alten Daten im Cache.--UlrichHeither (talk) 20:42, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Help - Speedy-Delete Corrupted Image File Needed.

Please Speedy-Delete the following corrupted image file => File:Mc6 mola.pdf regarding the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casius_quadrangle article - to make room for a newer, better version - Thank You in advance for your help with this - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 01:09, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible for an uploader to insist that larger images be deleted leaving only low-res versions?

My question applies to the image File:EPSON009.jpg, which was uploaded by User:アオイソラ ("Aoisora"), who appears to be the subject portrayed in the photo. The uploader replaced the original 1,808 x 1,216 file with a much smaller (326 x 220) version, and has recently nominated the entire file for deletion on the grounds that it compromises his personality rights. I'm not experienced enough to comment on whether this is a valid reason for deletion, but my secondary question applies to a copy of the same image recently uploaded by the same user at File:個展「饗宴」後藤 仁（GOTO JIN）.jpg. This is also a small (326 x 220) image, and includes an unnecessary watermark. I would like to ask whether it is permissible for other editors (e.g. me) to upload the large 1,808 x 1,216 version of File:EPSON009.jpg as a new version of File:個展「饗宴」後藤 仁（GOTO JIN）.jpg? This would make it a usable photo that could then actually be used on Wikipedia articles (such as en:Jin Goto). --DAJF (talk) 04:39, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm having trouble understanding the reason for the nomination, but it seems to be something to do with the copyrighted painting in the photo. I think the idea is that if the image is low-res enough, then the paintings will be de minimis, as they will not be detailed enough to be infringing. But I don't speak Japanese so it's kind of opaque to me –⁠moogsi (talk) 07:08, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Placing photograph of person on Wikipedia page from Commons

I have uploaded photo, how do I place it on Wikipedia page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saxonss (talk • contribs) 05:11, 14. Mai 2013‎ (UTC)

I added it to the article on en:wp. You can see the syntax I used there for future reference.--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:30, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Musiclanka ask help

Rawan Nada Album Cover

please help me to prove copyrights for this picture, i have rights for this picture,but i dont what are the details that i should submit to prove it mine,please give an advice,musiclanka —Preceding unsigned comment added by Musiclanka (talk • contribs) 06:11, 15 May 2013‎ (UTC)

• Assuming you do have the rights, you'll have to go through the procedure at COM:OTRS. In this case, you'll need to clarify how you have the rights, since unless you are the photographer and designer, both of those would have to have sign over those rights. - Jmabel ! talk 15:07, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Photo taken by a friend

I have some photos taken by a friend. He is very happy for them to be uploaded to Commons, but doesn't have the ability to do so himself. Can I upload them? In which case what form of words do I need to use? And does it make a difference if he wishes to remain anonymous?

Sorry if this is a question that's been often asked before, but I can't find anything covering it.--Ross Burgess (talk) 11:47, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ross. The best way is to act as his uploading "agent". If you can get reasonable looking permission to do the uploads, in an email from your friend (using a verifiable address) that explains that he is happy for you to upload any of his photos on the license chosen, then an OTRS volunteer can add a "ticket number" to any of the images that you later upload, which means that anyone can confirm that permission was granted if this is ever questioned. The original email can stay confidential, indeed there is no need for you or your friend to even use your real names on the public image pages if you prefer not to. Contact details and the process is described at COM:OTRS. --Fæ (talk) 11:59, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Advice from a New Yorker please

Hi, could someone work out the copyright status of this statue on 5th Avenue? The release from the photographer is fine, but as I don't know anything about this statue, I now think this might be a speedy deletion candidate. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:54, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• I don't know anything specific, but we do have a rather populated category for this statue so presumably they are either all good or none are. - Jmabel ! talk 15:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

w:Atlas (statue) was unveiled/published in 1937. If there was no copyright renewal within the 28 year window they would be public domain. Until a search is done then the whole category is in question. http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/ is where to start 28 years after 1937.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:5th Avenue (2).jpg looks like we keep them all.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:34, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

How to keep my photo in article?

How do I take care the RobertEarlSawyer.jpg can be used in the Robert Earl Sawyer article and stay there? It is mine and I use Wiki Commons but threat to delete it after 7 days. Fred Bokker (talk) 21:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)Fred Bokker

Convenience link to the file: File:RobertEarlSawyer.jpeg; to the article: Robert Earl Sawyer –⁠moogsi (talk) 21:52, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

The copyright belongs to the photographer back in 1942. If that was you back then then it is ok to keep.Canoe1967 (talk) 21:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

If you don't own the rights to this image, and you don't know where it was first published or who took it, then it will be deleted at Commons because we only accept free content. As the subject is no longer living, you can upload it at Wikipedia (not at Commons) as "fair use". See Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline –⁠moogsi (talk) 22:06, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Abada of Momogun.jpg

The file is to make a lesson purposes. I take from his Facebook but I can't put his URL facebook in to the public. But this is another URL that the file have: http://luckygrows.blogspot.com/2012/07/dr-mohd-zakaria-ilyas-genius-kdm.html. I think the file no need to removed from here. Thank you.

--Puunbatu (talk) 13:54, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:PD-text may work.--Canoe1967 (talk) 14:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:PD-ineligible is another.--Canoe1967 (talk) 14:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:LilianS.jpg

Hi, I upload pictures but all this are Material in the public domain... the main pages does not have copyright status on the publication of the images --Rhesmutenggert (talk) 14:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

See Commons:PD#Material_in_the_public_domain. Unless it was created 120 years ago then you should verify public domain before upload. That image will probably be deleted quickly but don't let it upset you. Any pictures you find on the net may seem free but most are not.--Canoe1967 (talk) 15:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

[via edit conflict] I see no reason to think this image would be in the public domain. Can you explain your rationale for believing it is? - Jmabel ! talk 15:29, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

"© 2013 ANR.org.py. Todo los derechos reservados." is at the bottom of the source page. You need to look for "CC-by-sa" or something similar for uploads to commons.--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Location of original work reproduced on your website

I am researching this drawing by John Singer Sargent: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sargent,_John_Singer_(1856-1925)_-_1917-20_-_Disegno_1.jpg#filehistory I am primarily interested to know where the drawing is located, in what collection. I am disappointed that this source information is not included with the information about the work. Can you tell me where this drawing is located?

Thank you, Jonathan Greenberg. jonathan.greenberg@sothebys.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.105.171.254 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 16 May 2013‎ (UTC)

Hi Jonathan, the drawing seems to be in the collection of the Harvard Art Museums (record online at http://www.harvardartmuseums.org/art/306089). I would contact them for more information –⁠moogsi (talk) 23:06, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Picture was overwritten with other content

User:Jo.Fruechtnicht overwrote File:Menckmal.jpg with other content. His version should be deleted. How can I or can anybody else do it? --Hydro (talk) 20:48, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I deleted this revision and notified the user not to do this. Information about revision deletion is at Commons:Revision deletion –⁠moogsi (talk) 23:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

The same user overwrote a 2,31 MB picture (File:NYC-Railbus.jpg) with a 43 KB version. Can this be correct? I think this version should be deleted, too. --Hydro (talk) 07:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

No need to delete it. Canoe1967 already fixed it, thx. --McZusatz (talk) 20:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright of paints that I am the owner but not the painter?

If I am or I know owners of paints, photos, sculptures, carves, or any artistic may I publish photos of such of objects? (for those which I know the owner: we their verbal agreement) Are such of photos free of any rights? May I publish them on wikimedia commons without any restriction, free of any rights?

And what about photos of artistic sculptures, paints in the street, on the public domain?

Thanks for your comprehensive answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris00toph (talk • contribs) 23:01, 16 May 2013‎ (UTC)

As the owner of an artwork, you don't own the copyright to the artwork. To upload a contemporary artwork, you need the agreement of the artist, who retains all the property rights to their work. If you obtain the artists permission via the process at Commons:OTRS, you can upload it on their behalf. We don't accept any assurace of a verbal agreement with the artist, because it's not verifiable that they've given their permission.

If you are uploading a photo of a sculpture, both the sculpture and the photograph are copyrighted. It's OK to upload if you yourself are the photographer, but if you are uploading someone else's photos then you need the verifiable permission of the photographer (again, sent to OTRS).

Note that the copyrights on artworks of which the creator died before 1926 have usually expired (depending on the source country of the artwork), and are not relevant. I hope this answers your question –⁠moogsi (talk) 23:19, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

To answer the last question, it depends on where you are in the world whether publicly-installed artworks are free to take pictures of. See Commons:Freedom of Panorama. –⁠moogsi (talk) 23:24, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Spam

Does anyone else see spam when they play File:En-us-humour.ogg in a video player? I do with VLC.--Canoe1967 (talk) 08:56, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

It seems there is no video stream (per ffmpeg). Nevertheless I could fix it with "ffmpeg -vn". The output was:

 Input #0, ogg, from 'En-us-humour.ogg':
 Duration: 00:00:00.90, start: 0.000000, bitrate: 108 kb/s
   Stream #0.0: Audio: vorbis, 44000 Hz, mono, s16, 80 kb/s
   Metadata:
     TITLE           : humour
     TLAN            : eng
     ARTIST          : Betsy Megas
     ORIG            : United States of America
     REGIO           : San Jose, California
     MATER           : ENG
     BIRTH           : 1976
     GENDER          : F
     LICENSE         : Creative Commons BY-CA
     DESCRIPTION     : Language: eng; Prononciation: ENG
     GENRE           : Pronunciation

--McZusatz (talk) 20:41, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I viewed the file with w:VLC media player. The image I think is spam is in the 'album cover' dataset. My player may have just grabbed an image of the net that matched or I may have some spammish VLC corruption. The image is a single frame of a fitness company with phone number painted on a large rubber band. VLC won't let me rip the image to host on an ftp for others to see what I see. I could take a screenshot though.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:17, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Sry, I forgot to mention that I saw it, too. And yes, 'album cover' makes sense. The new version I upload is fixed, though? --McZusatz (talk) 21:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I still see it but it may be my sys caches. Any other way to check if it is gone from commons?--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:39, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. --Canoe1967 (talk) 00:23, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

It has cleared from my caches now.

Wrong category

Hi, the pictures on http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:DB_Class_701 are tagged "Electric Multiple Units of Deutsche Bahn".

While they do have pantographs, those are for testing and for short-circuiting the catenary wire (to allow safe maintenance on the catenary wire) only. These vehicles are based on the Uerdinger Schienenbus, the famous DB Class 798 railbus, and thus are Diesel Multiple Units, powered by two Diesel engines. And they're never run in multiple mode - when they were converted from 798 to 701, the cabling that allows multiple mode was removed. -- 149.172.200.27 11:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

That category includes the 702 as well. Same thing? I removed it from the Multiple Units category assuming it is.--Canoe1967 (talk) 11:14, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Until 1972, Class 702 were single-engine versions, from 1973 onwards, a Class 702 designation meant added additional hydrodynamic and track brakes. All of them are solely Diesel-powered. -- 188.99.198.158 08:31, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. --Canoe1967 (talk) 00:26, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

How in the world do you download photos from WikiMedia commons? Should be simplest thing in the world, but it's not..

I simply want to download a photo to my hard drive, but it just doesn't happen.

I go to a section of photos -- let's say the category of Lakes. I pick out a lake and click on "Download all sizes" to the right of the photo.

Up comes a window that says "Download this file". At the bottom it gives me an option on image size. I click on the size I want.

Up comes a beautiful copy of the photo in the size I requested. And absolutely no indication that there is any way to download this photo.

What's going on? What am I missing?

Thank you so much for any help.

Don —Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.34.32.95 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 18 May 2013‎ (UTC)

Once you have the image on you screen then 'right click' your mouse. Select "save picture as..." Make sure it is fully expanded in case it is shrunk to fit your screen. If the magnifying glass shows a '+' then click that for full size. Rembember where you saved it or Bill Gates will hide it deep in your computer. This is all for Win7 and the IE9 browser.--Canoe1967 (talk) 00:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Or you can right click on any link under Size of this preview:, Other resolutions:, or on the Full resolution‎ link and select Save link as... JKadavoor Jee 03:19, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

license issue

Hello

My name is Baldev from india.

I want to create a website for m company and i want to use some pictures -

can i use pictures with these license ?

 > Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

Kindly guide me thorugh which pictures are free for commercial use?

Regards Baldevsinh Chauhan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.211.100.86 (talk • contribs) 07:28, 18 May 2013‎ (UTC)

Hi Baldev! All files accepted by Commons (with the exception of Wikimedia logos and photographic reproductions of public domain works, where Wikimedia has elected to ignore local legislation) are free for commercial use with respect to copyright, including files published under a valid Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license. However, there is no pre-approval process for uploads, users often upload copyright violations with false copyright claims, and we don't catch all of them. Assessing that the copyright information provided is correct as well as accounting for non-copyright considerations such as trademark and personality rights is your responsibility. Please read Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia. (This is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, you should consult a lawyer.) —LX (talk, contribs) 13:48, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Use of CC BY 2.0 on the commons

I upload a derivative (invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast) of an image (siliconoma) on the commons. The original work was licenced under CC BY 2.0. The upload form doesn't let me choose that as a valid license. Is the original work in violation or should CC BY 2.0 be available as an option? I changed the copyright to CC BY 2.0 after uploading it. I'd like to have a confirm this is all kosher. Thanks! Nephron  T|C 20:09, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you can choose any Commons-compatible license for files you upload. If the Upload Wizard isn't doing what you want, you have the alternative of Commons:Upload, which in some circumstances will direct you towards the old upload form, which allows you more freedom in what you can put on the page. CC-BY 2.0 should perhaps be an option in the Upload Wizard, it is still in development and some of the design goals are simplicity and usability compared to the other methods. It's difficult to give each CC tag we do allow as an option –⁠moogsi (talk) 21:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

The CC-BY-SA 2.0 license that you used is fine. A lot of free licenses are accepted on Commons. But for practical reasons only a small sample of those acceptable licenses are automatically included into the particular upload tool that is called the upload wizard. If you want to use an acceptable license that is not included in the sample of the UW, you can still use it, like Moogsi explained above. Also, note that when you make a "derivative work" (not in the copyright law meaning, but in the particular meaning attributed to that expression in the text of the CC licenses of the series 2.0, that is to say, basically when you make any modified version of the original work), the CC-BY-SA 2.0 license of the original work explicitely allows you the option to either offer the modified work under the same license as the original work or, if you so choose, to upgrade the "derivative work" to a later version of the license, that is to say, to relicense the modified work under a CC-BY-SA 3.0 license instead of under a CC-BY-SA 2.0 license. Thus, technically, you could have offered the modified image under a CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. However, in the present case, given the particular nature of the original image (a juxtaposition of two images, which you separated) and given the nature of your modification, which does not generate a distinct copyrightable authorship, I think you made a good choice by choosing to offer the modified work under the same license as the original, CC-BY-SA 2.0. For conformity with the license, do not forget to describe in the description page the nature of the modification you made. Finally, if I may ask, why did you reduce the size of the modified image? You uploaded it in the size 318x250 px, when it could have been uploaded in a size of about 650x470 px. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:26, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I didn't realize I didn't download the largest size. I fixed the size. Thanks for the quick replies Asclepias and Moogsi! Nephron  T|C 23:28, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Metadata of an image I just uploaded inadvertently reveals private information.

I have just uploaded File:Plastic laundry basket.jpg which, on the face of it, seems to be a completely harmless image - some might even call it boring. However, the image metadata contains the GPS coordinates of my home! That's not something I want to reveal to the entire Wikiverse. Can the metadata be redacted to remove it?

(Note to self: Don't upload photos taken with my phone camera onto the interwebs! Use a camera without a GPS.) Dodger67 (talk) 12:12, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

• You can download to a computer, use the freely available 'exiftool' to remove any EXIF information you don't want in the image, and re-upload. Meanwhile, you should probably ask for speedy deletion (uploader request on recently uploaded image) on the one you find too revealing. - Jmabel ! talk 14:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I've deleted the file for now, you can upload it again after removing your personal information from the Exif.  ■ MMXX ^talk 15:14, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

How to clarify the ownership of images from the internet?

I got a message from user Takeaway:

"I saw that you have uploaded four images on May 19, 2013. These four images seem to have been copied from the internet although in the file description, you claim to be the author. Can you please clarify the ownership of these images? - Takeaway (talk) 10:20, 19 May 2013 (UTC)"

The images he is referring to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kwai_river_boat.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sunset_on_the_Yangtze_River.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Yangtze_river_cruise.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Angor_wat_cambodia.jpg

Come from a website (rivercruises.net) That I designed, created, own, and manage. So how can I clarify these are indeed my own images just that I published them on the website first before wikicommons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuner tom (talk • contribs)

Please, see Commons:OTRS for instructions. Ruslik (talk) 18:02, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:Kevin Avery at Bookcourt 121311.jpg

The photographer, Mitchell Bilus, has given permission to use this photo on Wikipedia. I have an e-mail from him saying so, and can forward it. Please advise what else I have to do.

Thanks.

--Chidder (talk) 19:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

See Commons:OTRS. There is a template there that he should follow and email. "..use this photo on Wikipedia" doesn't cover enough.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:30, 19 May 2013 (UTC)