Template talk:Cc-pd-mark-footer

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

intended use[edit]

What is intended use of this template? I assume that it should be added to all PD licenses used at Commons, but if that is the intent than plenty templates still do not have it. If I understand it correctly than Ideally all templates transcluding {{PD-Layout}} will also transclude this template. --Jarekt (talk) 17:07, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Only a subset of the public domain templates should use this footer. For example {{PD-self}} shouldn't be using this one. Multichill (talk) 16:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
It should be used also on {{Flickr-no known copyright restrictions}}? Could you write down some istructions for its use? Thank you--Trixt (talk) 09:01, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
No, please no. We shouldn't even accept {{Flickr-no known copyright restrictions}} as a license template! (but that's a different discussion). I'll see if [1] can be used to write up some guidelines. Multichill (talk) 13:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Regarding {{Flickr-no known copyright restrictions}}: Don't worry, I agree with you (see Template talk:Flickr-no known copyright restrictions#Straw poll to restore this as a licensing template), but unfortunately it exists, actually... Thank you, a guideline will help.--Trixt (talk) 15:01, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

change cat[edit]

{{editprotected}} This is not a license tag. The cat should be put in the documentation and changed to "subtemplates". Cheers --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 15:22, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

✓ DoneKwj2772 (msg) 05:28, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

template incorrect if multiple license templates are used[edit]

Copied from Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2012/04#.7B.7BCc-pd-mark-footer.7D.7D_makes_little_sense_for_files_that_have_multiple_licenses.

Many files have multiple licenses. Our Licensing policy gives example of a music recording where we might need separate licenses for:

  • The score of the music (rights by the composer)
  • The lyrics of the song (rights by the writer)
  • The performance (rights by the performers)
  • The recording (rights by the technical personnel / recording company)

Also all photos of sculptures should have one license for original sculpture and a separate license for the photograph. {{Licensed-PD-Art}} template is for images of public domain objects with CC or PD digitization depending on country. This creates situation where many files have both PD and CC templates. The problem is that many PD licenses add {{Cc-pd-mark-footer}} which claims that "This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law" which is clearly incorrect if other parts of the artwork are released under CC or other non-PD licenses. No files should be in both Category:CC-PD-Mark and Category:CC-BY-SA-3.0 but there is probably some overlap. What can be done about it? Ideally {{Cc-pd-mark-footer}} message would only show up on the page if ALL license templates on the page are PD. This might be possible with some java scripts but not with templates (AFAIK). We can also add yet another parameter to all PD templates adding {{Cc-pd-mark-footer}} to suppress it and a bot can occasionally add this parameter to all the files that have both PD and other licenses. This solution is especially tricky since we seem to have over 1500 license templates transcluding {{Cc-pd-mark-footer}}. --Jarekt (talk) 13:56, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Files like this should not have Cc-pd-mark-footer since they are not in PD. How should we fix it? --Jarekt (talk) 14:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)