User:NYScholar/WikipediaCopyright-relatedIssues

General information
For general information about the status of current Wikipedia policies pertaining to copyright, fair use, and copyright infringement, please consult also: Please do the same for: Thank you. (I do not have time to discuss any of these matters further in Wikipedia.) --NYScholar 20:52, 3 September 2006 (UTC) [Updated list of links. --NYScholar 00:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC); Please see also later updates below. --NYScholar 18:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)]
 * List of policies
 * Copyrights
 * WikiProject Fair use
 * Image use policy
 * Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DCMA),
 * External links provided therein and below.
 * trademark, and other various topics, issues, and controversies pertaining to
 * intellectual property, including musical, audio-visual, multi-media, and digitally-formatted properties.

Some related United States Government resources
(All accessed 3 September 2006. Updated 11 November 2007.)
 * United States Copyright Office.
 * Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code: Circular 92.
 * Preface.
 * Definitions.
 * Section 106.
 * Section 106a.
 * Section 107.
 * Fact sheet for Fair Use (July 2006).
 * Section 108.
 * Section 113.
 * Note 37.
 * Note 38.
 * Note 39.
 * Note 45.
 * FAQ.
 * FAQ: How is a copyright different from a patent or a trademark?
 * United States Patent and Trademark Office.
 * Basic Facts about Trademarks.
 * Visual Art Works. (With relevant links.)

Information pertaining to registered trademarks and copyright pertaining to images of the Nobel Prize Medals

 * The Nobel Prize Medals at nobelprize.org.
 * "The Nobel Peace Prize Medal" at nobelprize.org. (Cf. Image:DSCN0732.JPG, a "Derivative work", whose image page and use in Wikipedia's Nobel Prize infobox are still disputed, given its closeness to the registered trademark and copyrighted image of the Nobel Foundation, its "author" of record.)
 * For discussion, please see: Image: Nobel medal dsc06171.jpg, its talk page, and cross-linked images and talk pages.
 * For the Nobel Foundation's "Copyright and Trademark Information", please see "Copyright and Trademark" on its site and the related PDF. Specifically, re: its "Trademarks": it states:Trademarks: The names, titles, building images, trademarks, service marks and logos that appear on the Site are registered and unregistered marks of the Nobel Foundation, including but not limited to Nobel Prize®, the Nobel Medal® design mark, Nobelprize.org™, Nobel Museum®, Nobelmuseet®, Nobel Media™ and Nobel Symposia™ (collectively, the 'Nobel Foundation trademarks'). The Nobel Foundation is most restrictive in permitting use of these trademarks, and you may not use the Nobel Foundation trademarks without prior written permission from the Nobel Foundation.
 * For the "copyright" information, please check the same links and linked PDF:Copyright

Copyright and Trademark Information The documents and materials presented at Nobelprize.org are generally protected by copyright and related rights or as trademarks and trade names. For use of such material, permission in writing from Nobel Web AB or the Nobel Foundation is required. All rights reserved. For detailed information, see Terms and Conditions of Use. [Link to "Legal Notice" provided on site] Pdf 110 kB »
 * I've added a query on the Media copyright questions page..
 * I've also added links in the query to WP:IUP, particularly to WP:IUP and WP:IUP; see also WP:IUP for guidance.
 * For a source published in 1963 with illustrations of the Medals for the Nobel Peace Prize, see the Library of Congress entry for: "Nobel Peace Prize". Look.  Photograph collection.  19 Dec. 1963. (Notice refers to some "restricted rights".)
 * Cites "11 images published in" an article entitled "The Nobel Prize", produced by Jack Star, Look 28.6 (24 Mar. 1964): 72-78.
 * For an online catalogue to the "Look Magazine Photograph Collection", one may want to consult Archive at the Library of Congress.
 * "Copyright and Other Restrictions That Apply to Publication/Distribution of Images: Assessing the Risk of Using a P&P Image". [Copyright regulations pertaining to publication of images provided by the Library of Congress].  [Hyperlinked; see "duration of copyrights" ("How Long Copyrights Last"), as  pertains specifically to photographs and other images whose documented publication is protected by copyrights in the United States (per se) and/or whose copyrights have been registered in the United States (per se).  That webpage is hyperlinked and provides links to U.S. Copyright Office documents that pertain to the publication of images inside and outside of the U.S., including the U.S. Copyright Office PDF circular "Copyright Basics", which provides information about "one complicating factor" pertaining to images that were work for hire: One complicating factor is when someone makes an image for someone else (a work "for hire"). The U.S. Copyright Office information has this to say about such situations: Works made for hire may be protected by copyright by the employer, not the employee. (Circular 1 [pdf], "Copyright Basics," page 2). The duration of copyright for works for hire and for anonymous and pseudonymous works is 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter.  That appears to apply to works protected by copyright in the United States; how it applies to copyright and to possible renewals of copyright in other countries is not stated in that quotation; see page 2 of Circular 1 through at least page 6 of Circular 1 for more information, particularly about automatic renewal of copyright (not requiring registration) provided in revisions of the 1976 U.S. law: "*[asterisk]Note: The copyright in works eligible for renewal on or after June 26, 1992, will vest in the name of the renewal claimant on the effective date of any renewal registration made during the 28th year of the original term. Otherwise, the renewal copyright will vest in the party entitled to claim renewal as of December 31st of the 28th year."
 * The full U.S. Copyright Code (Title 17) is accessible as a PDF file: Circular 92: Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Tıtle 17 of the United States Code. Cf. earlier sections posted above w/ links to the U.S. Copyright Office.
 * Chapter 13 of Title 17 (Circular 92) pertains to "Protection of Original Designs" (226–240). (Note pertaining to designs/images that result from work for hire: [following the notes provided for figuring out the copyright duration]: 1902 plus 95 years begins in 1998; 1902 plus 120 years begins in 2023.  See page 240 and previous refs. to automatic renewals of copyrights in later revisions of the 1976 U.S. law.  See note 6: "6. The effective date of chapter 13 is October 28, 1998. See section 505 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which appears in Appendix V.")  Given the note from page 6 already quoted, the 28th year from 1902 begins in 1931, plus 95 years begins in 2026; the 28th year from 1902 begins in 1931, plus 120 years begins in 2053.  The shorter of the two durations would apply (2026).  (Those dates are possibly also contingent on whether or not the copyrights ever existed in U.S. law and/or were ever renewed in U.S. law.  See chart below.)
 * The Cornell University chart linked via the Library of Congress: "Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States 1 January 2007 (note) 1: Never Published, Never Registered Works". (See references and qualifications throughout the notes to what constitutes a "work" that can be considered "published"; the pdf version provides a link to the most current html version as well.)  Note the dates pertaining to work for hire relating to commissioned designs for a three-dimensional object (e.g., a "medal" that is "minted") (by a non-person author, organizational/corporate entity) that may "never have been published" or "never registered" in the United States per se.  If the "designs" for the medals were "published" and "registered" (and their "creation," "publication," and "copyrights"/"trademarks" pertaining to those "designs" for the medals) were renewed in Sweden after 1902, that information needs to be researched and taken account of as well.  The copyright and trademark notices on the Nobel Foundation website claim ongoing "proprietary rights" to all the items referred to as "collectively, the 'Nobel Foundation trademarks'" cited in the quotation at top of this section.  Those include the designs of the images of the "Nobel Prize®" medals, namely: "the Nobel Medal® design mark", images of which are presented on the copyrighted website (2007).  In the Cornell U chart, see the last section: "(Note: Architectural plans and drawings may also be protected as textual/graphics works)."
 * The language of that note relates to already-cited (see above) references in U.S. copyright law to "designs" for sculptures and other works of art that are commissioned: Chapter 13 of Title 17 (Circular 92) pertains to "Protection of Original Designs" (226–240). See espec. Section 113 ("Scope of exclusive rights in pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works") (c) for possibly-relevant points pertaining to images of the "Nobel Prize® medals" uploaded to Wikipedia and/or Wikipedia Commons, and their use in Wikipedia articles.

Some additional information re: the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum photographs

 * [Pertains to Image:Czeslawa-Kwoka.jpg and Image:Czeslawa-Kwoka2.jpg and the Wikipedia Commons versions of these images. See links in templates for discussions, Czesława Kwoka, and Talk:Czesława Kwoka.  (Copy of my comment posted in the latter talk page.) --NYScholar (talk) 09:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum features only some photographs for which it acknowledges credit to other Museums (through a reciprocal agreement with them); it has an online photo archive which is searchable; it does not appear to include the 3 photographs of Kwoka taken by Wilhelm Brasse. As an example of its policy of presenting such photographs from the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum, which it calls the National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum, in the credits, with a copyright notice to the U.S. Holocaust Museum featured at the bottom of the Webpage with the photograph: see "Persecution of Homosexuals in the Third Reich": Media ID3163, an illustration in its online article about homosexual prisoners at Auschwitz. I linked at some point in comments about these "identification" photographs (e.g., in that linked article; see also lefthand menu for additional photos) to the USHMM's own statement about its reciprocal agreement with A-B Museum, etc., in featuring some copies of that and other Museums' exhibits (the copies are made w/ stated agreements that the other museums own them, that they are the property of the other museums, which have in effect loaned them to the USHMM via their reciprocal agreement). The USHMM description of its online photo archive refers explicitly to photographs like these not being in the "public domain" (in the U.S.) and that "special permission" has been acquired from the museums and collectors who do own them to allow the USHMM to include them in its "Photo archive": see particularly: "Approximately 14,000 of the 85,000 historical photographs in the Photo Archives are available through this online catalog. More are being added each month. In general, only photographs belonging to the Museum or determined to be in the public domain are featured in this online catalog. However, in a few instances special permission has been obtained to include photographs belonging to other archives or collectors. (italics and bold added)"

That statement acknowledging that USHMM had to acquire ("obtained") "special permission ... to include photographs belonging to other archives or collectors" and the credit acknowledgment in the featured "identification" photographs linked above (for "Media ID3163") to the "National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum", coupled with the copyright notice to the USHMM for its own Webpage indicates that the identification photographs from the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum are not "in the "public domain in the United States." There is no indication, moreover, that the photographs of Kwoka were published before or by 1996, as a statement claims on the talk page of the image(s) included in this Wikipedia article.  (There is also no reference by the USHMM to these particular KL Auschwitz "identification" photographs [featured in its online photo archive through agreement of the Ausch.-Birk. State Museum; with its permission] actually being "in the public domain in Poland" either.)


 * [Adding link to its Website copyright notice: disclaimer as well, which also refers to properties held by other institutions and individuals, which it gives proper credit to in its acknowledgments featured under the photographs; see lefthand menu for additional examples. --NYScholar (talk) 10:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)]

Anyone may explore this information on the USHMM Website and compare it with other credits given to the Auschwitz-Birkenau (State) Museum by a newspaper that features the photographs of Kwoka, that I have already cited in previous discussions, which gives credit to both the Museum and the Associated Press in reprinting the photograph. I have found no "identification photographs" featured on the Website for the BBC/PBS documentary series that I cited above; those photographs of prisoners appear to be historical photographs taken in 1945 at liberation, outside the camp, and are different kinds of photographs not attributed to anyone or to any publication or any exhibit in any museum.

(cont.) If the KL Auschwitz "identification" photographs taken from the photo archive of the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum were actually "in the public domain in the United States", the USHMM would not have to acknowledge/credit the "National Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum" in publishing them on its Website featuring examples from its photo archive of materials from that Museum.

(cont.) That is the most I've been able to find out so far about the photographs. All the other sources that I've cited in the Wikipedia articles on Kwoka, Wilhelm Brasse, and The Portraitist do not give any indication that these photographs are in the "public domain" in the United States or a date when they were "first published" or where they were "first published". These only other instances of "publications" (online) that I have seen still credit them and make no reference to "public domain" (anywhere). They indicate the opposite: that they are owned by the Ausch.-Birk. State Museum. If the photographs of Kwoka were "first published" by the Museum at any time, it could be in its own publications listed in it exhibit catalogues or other books: see already-provided EL. It appears that none of those was published before 1999; some 2000 and afterward (as cited in the "References" for this article.

(cont.) I have seen no evidence provided by any uploader of these photographs to document the claim that they were published in or by 1996. Despite the claims made in the reviews of the images (pertaining to the "PD-Poland" or "PD-Polish" templates), no definitive evidence has been supplied yet by anyone that these particular photographs of Kwoka were "first published" in Poland without a copyright by 1994 or in or by 1996 (as variously claimed by Wikipedia users/editors/uploaders).

(cont.) Because the photographer, Wilhelm Brasse is known and holds up these photographs of Kwoka in the documentary film made about him in 2005 (seen in captures have been made from the film also copyright-protected on its distributor's Website--see EL sec. w/ link), it is also clear that Brasse did not "publish" the photographs (via being filmed with them) prior to 2005, and the film has a copyright notice still in force. and he is still alive (though now in his 90s), so any copyright he may have residing in that film (I don't know his contractural agreement with the film company) would appear also still to be in force. Whether or not he signed over his copyright on photographs that he took whose copies were in his own possession (or borrowed from the Museum photo archive), I do not know. (The exhibit features copies of the original photographs, not the original photographs, which are still held in the photo archive in Auschwitz-Birkenau.) The copyright status of these particular photographs still seems a fairly complex matter with some unanswered questions remaining, and it does not seem to be a clear case in which "public domain in the United States" can be definitively asserted. How "fair use" comes into play here, I do not know; but it would appear that a fair use rationale is still needed in Wikipedia for these images which still appear to be "non-free" or protected by some copyrights (Museum's, Brasse's, and also TVP1/Recontrplan (distributor). [If anyone wants me to move this sec. of comments to my own user subpage re: copyright issues, I will be copying it there and can provide a link to it here.] --NYScholar (talk) 09:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


 * (cont.) A different example, credited to both Brasse [as the photographer] and an individual donor and copyright the USHMM is this one: Mugshot of a female Auschwitz prisoner Lena Lakony (no. 34800). (Photograph #66649); one can follow the links or do a search in the "identification photographs" held in the USHMM Photo Archives, and find related examples.* [I found it by searching the USHMM Photo Archives for terms "Brasse Auschwitz".] The credits given and the copyright notices for what may be the "first publication" of such "identification" photographs taken by Brasse do not have notices stating "public domain" in either Poland or in the United States; there are clear acknowledgments and credits and copyright notices in their publication via that online photo archive and no date of "first publication" given, other than dates the entire online photo archive/USHMM Website.  The online publications via the online photo archive may actually be their "first publication" of many of these photographs.  One needs to investigate when the online archive first went online (was "first published") for such a definitive date of "first publication" of each one of the images.  (I did not find Brasse's photographs of Kwoka via the search facility; it could be there, but a simple search for full name or surname did not bring it up.)  --NYScholar (talk) 10:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC) [added bracketed instructions for finding timed-out link. --NYScholar (talk) 21:40, 18 September 2008 (UTC)]
 * (asterisk)*See "Mugshot of a female Auschwitz prisoner Lena Lakony (no. 34800). (Photograph #66649) (the photograph linked above); see its caption:

"Mugshot of a female Auschwitz prisoner Lena Lakony (no. 34800). Date: 1941. Locale: Auschwitz, [Upper Silesia] Poland; Birkenau; Auschwitz III; Monowitz; Auschwitz II. Photographer: Wilhelm Brasse. Credit: USHMM, courtesy of Esther Lurie. Copyright: USHMM. (added periods for posting here)  . Accessed 19 Sept. 2008."


 * N.B.: I cannot devote any more time to these matters. I've provided all I have time to provide.

Related references

 * Achtert, Walter S. "The New Copyright Law." PMLA 93 (1978): 572-77.  (Accessible via Jstor (University Library subscription-based.)  Accessed 10 Nov. 2007.  (Pertains to the U.S. Copyright Revision Act of 1976.)
 * Young, Jeffrey R. "Panel Issues Guide to Using Copyrighted Material in the Classroom".  The Chronicle of Higher Education 11 Nov. 2008, Today's News. Accessed 11 Nov. 2008.  (Includes hyperlinked Guide entitled Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Media Literacy Education (Also accessible as a downloadable 20-page PDF directly from the Website of the Center for Social Media, at American University.)

Problems that academic scholars find in Wikipedia

 * Read, Brock. "Can Wikipedia Ever Make the Grade?" Chronicle of Higher Education 27 October 2006. Accessed 9 July 2007.  (For additional articles on Wikipedia in the Chronicle, see its menu links in "Related materials.")

Related perspectives
[Both projects, Citizendium and Scholarpedia, require editors to use their actual names in ways that identify their specific credentials as experts in their fields.]
 * Lapp, Alison. "Wikipedia's Opponent". PC Magazine 2 May 2007.  Accessed 9 July 2007. (Concerns the founding of Citizendium and Scholarpedia.)
 * Citizendium: The Citizens' Compendium: Welcome page. Founded by Wikipedia's co-founder Larry Sanger.  (Described misleadingly in the cross-linked Wikinews article as "a Wikipedia fork".  Though early memoranda by Sanger initially described it as such, Citizendium is not any longer a so-called "Wikipedia fork"; it is now a separate project, independent of Wikipedia.  It serves now as an alternative to Wikipedia.)
 * Scholarpedia: The Free Peer Reviewed Encyclopedia: Welcome page––another project also conceived as an academic scholarly alternative to Wikipedia in specific technical fields. ("Scholarpedia is a free peer-reviewed encyclopedia that combines the philosophies of Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica. Scholarpedia hosts Encyclopedia of Computational Neuroscience, Encyclopedia of Dynamical Systems, and Encyclopedia of Computational Intelligence.  All three will be published in a printed form, and will be used as seeds to start Encyclopedia of Cognitive Neuroscience, Encyclopedia of Applied Mathematics, and Encyclopedia of Computer Science [later next year (2007)].")
 * "Thought Leader: Wikipedia vs. Encyclopedia" (Web). Delta-Sky: The Official Inflight Magazine of Delta Air Lines, December 2008.  Accessed 17 December 2008.  ("Earlier this year, [Andrew] Keen and [Jimmy] Wales appeared at Inforum, a division of the Commonwealth Club of California, which is the largest and oldest public forum in the United States. Following is a portion of their discussion, moderated by National Public Radio's David Ewing Duncan.")

Jimmy Wales on the importance of properly-sourced material

 * Wales, Jimmy. "Getting Rid of Bad Fair Use".  lists.wikimedia.org 19 May 2006.  Accessed 9 July 2006.  (Advocates deleting copyright violations from Wikipedia and its related Wikis and following "fair use" provisions of copyright laws.)
 * –––. Keynote Address excerpt. Wikimania, August 2006.
 * –––. "WikiEN-l Zero Information Is Preferred to Misleading or False Information". mail.wikimedia.org 16 May 2006. Wales asserts: "We have a really serious responsibility to get things right."

Importance of properly-sourced material in articles pertaining to living persons

 * WP:BLP: "Be very firm about high-quality references, particularly about details of personal lives. 'Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space'" (Qtd. from List of policies).
 * These principles also apply to material about living persons in other articles and for all articles on any subjects. The responsibility in Wikipedia for justifying contentious or otherwise questionable content of all kinds but especially for contentious or otherwise questionable content about living persons rests firmly on the shoulders of the Wikipedia editor providing the content.

Academic Criticism of Wikipedia

 * Cohen, Noam. "Education: A History Department Bans Using Wikipedia As a Research Source". The New York Times 21 February 2007.  Accessed 9 July 2007.
 * Gonsalves, Antone. "Britannica Slams Nature's Wikipedia Comparison".  InformationWeek 24 March 2006.  Accessed 9 July 2007.
 * Wales, Jimmy. "Wikipedia Founder Discourages Academic Use of His Creation". The Chronicle of Higher Education 12 June 2006, "The Wired Campus: Education News from around the Web".  Accessed 9 July 2007.