Template talk:Non-free with permission

what's the point
What is the point of this tag, if the image can be used under fair use, why would we ask for permission? They could say no and we don't need it. It just confuses people making them think they can ask for permission for wikipedia only, then use this tag, when permission is the correct tag to use. - cohesion 00:04, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Someone put this on an image which I had uploaded with the express permission of the copyright holder (my lecturer). But the fair use bit is irrelevant, it's simply an authorised use. Is there a more appropriate tag for the situation I'm in? Psychobabble 03:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The tag you are looking for is permission, but that means we cannot use the image. Wikipedia can't use images that we have sole permission for, they need to be freely licensed, for example under the GFDL or Creative Commons or usable under fair use. See the image use policy for more info. - cohesion 23:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If the image was distribute as part of a Electronic Press Kit, then Wikipedia as part of the mass media is given permission to use the image. This does not extend to third parties. --Petri Krohn 00:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Right, so what benefit does this tag add that the normal fair use tags and rationale lack? - cohesion 23:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * NFCC#2, for one thing. It's not infringement if the copyright owner wants us to use it. -Nard 21:11, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ha, I'm still watching this :) Ehh, I dunno, it's not very often that #2 is the only thing that is wrong with an image. I don't care that strongly, it's not bad, just useless imo :) - cohesion 01:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Someone said that Wikipedia can't use fair use "with permission" images. They may have been referring to Wikimedia Commons. Wikipedia allows fair use "with permission" images. It is also possible that policy has changed over the past year. --Thinboy00 talk/contribs @986, i.e. 22:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oops, that was wrong. --Thinboy00 talk/contribs @988, i.e. 22:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Template still in active use
I have removed the 'deprecated image copyright' tag as it was added without discussion or comment. As far as I can tell, tagging it as deprecated is incorrect, as there exists no substitute for this template, and it is still being actively used. Additionally, per the May 2009 deletion discussion, it appears that the community still supports the use of this template. LK (talk) 04:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletion proposals
Before proposing for deletion, will proposers please read through the previous deletion discussions? It's pretty clear that some still find this template useful and see a reason to keep it. Also, if proposing for deletion, please make sure to link to the previous deletion discussions in the proposal. LK (talk) 09:11, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Interlink needed
"fair-use image tag" is not linked. It says you need one of these. I think it should be linked here File copyright tags, to look like this; fair-use image tag--Wyn.junior (talk) 17:23, 31 March 2019 (UTC) Or maybe File copyright tags/Non-free, either way people should be directed to the place with the list of tags--Wyn.junior (talk) 17:48, 31 March 2019 (UTC)