User:Jackson Peebles/Adoption/Tattoodwaitress Exam 7

Here's the test. Don't worry if you struggle a bit with this one. Be sure to explain your answers so I can tell where you're coming from, however as this topic has potential legal ramifications, I won't be able to accept all answers as long as you're thinking and will be more stringent here. Let's go.

1.) Q- Is Wikipedia truly free? This is an opinion question
 * A-yes
 * ✅ 4/5 - No justification provided, which I would have preferred, but I suppose I didn't stipulate that you had to. See Wikipedia_is_free_content.

2.) Q- List three times when you can upload a picture to the Commons.
 * A- only free images allowed and/or...


 * public domain 150yrold (fair use is not permitted in commons)
 * released under a free license such as ccbysa
 * your own work that you will release copyright
 * ✅ 5/5 - Very good, all proper requirements.

3.) Q- You find music displaying this license (non-commercial). Can we upload it to Commons?
 * A-no commons only accepts free media which can be used by anyone at anytime the non commercial has a restriction.
 * ✅ 5/5 - Ding!

4.) Q- A user uploads a collage of all the Phillies' 2008 players' official team photographs so the photos spell 08 (background: the Phillies won the World Series in 2008). Is this suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia? The user in question created it himself.
 * A- This is a confusing one for me. I am going to say NO but I might say yes if i had more information only because of the year being 2008 and that it probably isn't possible in 2013 to get images of all the players in their uniforms like the official photos. Additionally, you would need to get permission from the photographer to use the photos even though he created the collage himself. If they are all living persons AND all still playing for the phillies then it would be possible to obtain images of all by another means. Also would a collage created like that really add to the article or would it be a bit overboard. Airing on the side of caution here I will say no that it could not be used on Wikipedia. But really i would need more info to adequately answer. You can only use someone elses work if they grant permission for anyone to use copy modify and sell it.
 * ✅ 4/5 - Your base answer is yes, which is correct. You are right that you'd need the photographer's permission.  This is a derivative work, which is the key.  Better safe than sorry.

5.) Q- What is a derivative work?
 * A- example would be a picture of a piece of art or an edited version of a picture. It is a representation of one or more works already existing and may be transformed or edited, annotated or adapted a bit but which as a whole represents the original.
 * ✅ 5/5 - Good explanation!

6.) Q- Can you upload a press image of Barack Obama?
 * A- no he is a living person an alternate image may be obtained by another means such as government official. You can only use someone elses work if they grant permission for anyone to use copy modify and sell it
 * ✅ 5/5 - Correct! Use other methods rather than non-free media in this scenario.

7.) Q- What about a press image of a man on death row?
 * A- no he is still a living person if he has not been put to death yet and therefore and image can be obtained another way such as by an employee of the prison. You can only use someone elses work if they grant permission for anyone to use copy modify and sell it.
 * ✅  2 5/5 - I seriously doubt that an employee of the prison would be ethically allowed to post a picture of an inmate. This is more likely a case where it is okay to use a press image under fair use guidelines unless there is a suitable alternative available.

Alright Jackson Peebles, Hmmmm well I happened to find an image used here on wiki of a death row inmate and it said the image was taken by an employee which is where I got my example. Hmmm of course I cant remember the inmate but now i will go and search for it to see if I can show you. File:Spetersonmug1.1.jpg Yep there it is I found the example by going into browser history. Ok woohoo i found the example i used in my answer for this question can I get a re grade? lol. TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ  '' 19:46, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I hate being wrong. I will give you full points back.  After additional research (in hopes of contradicting you, I might add, I discovered that prisoners do not have the right to privacy in the United States (nor do we, really, lol).

8.) Q- What would you do if you found an image that was not released under a suitable tag for inclusion on Wikipedia (e.g., all rights were reserved and the work was not in the public domain)?
 * A-i would not use the image unless i had gotten prior consent which entails asking permission from the copyright holder. you can write them letters or send an email request (there are example letters hosted here on wiki for use) and you would point them in the direction of filling out the release form allowing wiki to use the work. it is much easier if they upload the image them selves too. UNLESS there is no other free alternative and then I could use a smaller portion of the image as long as it meets all of the requirements 1-10 Non free content criteria (and does not have a living person in the image.
 * ✅ 5/5 - Correct. Again, better safe than sorry.

9.) Q- A final practical test... Go. Have a snoop around some wikipedia articles, see if you can find an image which is currently being used under "fair use". Come back and link to it (using File:G. Peacock Men's Health.jpg. You must get the : before the File name, as we cannot display the image here!)
 * ✅ 5/5 - Yup! Amusing find!

Once you have finished, please notify me on my talk page, then proceed to Lesson 8: Policy.
 * ✅ Good work! 4 0 3/45 Proceed (as you already have)!  --Jackson Peebles (talk) 19:08, 10 August 2013 (UTC)