Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2008 July 18



Image:Krishna depictions in Todai-ji Temple of Nara.png

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as F8 by A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

 Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Original image updated by the author (me), it may look similar, as any image of the architectural object that is 100 years old, it is not the same Redtiger. There can be hundreds photos of this depiction. Wikidās ॐ 09:34, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Shiva parvati01.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I3 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

 Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Murugan1.gif

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

 Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Image:Tirutani murugan.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I9 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

 Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

 Rossrs (talk) 15:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Image has covers of magazines. It does not have content of those magazines. It has been long held Wikipedia policy that like album covers, magazine covers may be used within fair use, if used appropriately (for the purpose of comment or criticism.) Here is a list of magazine covers on Wikipedia

Additionally, the rationale for this follows:

"Under the fair use doctrine of the U.S. copyright statute, it is permissible to use limited portions of a work including quotes, for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports. There are no legal rules permitting the use of a specific number of words, a certain number of musical notes, or percentage of a work. Whether a particular use qualifies as fair use depends on all the circumstances." U.S. Copyright Office

I assert that this image is for the purpose of commentary, criticism, and scholarly use within the Encyclopedia called Wikipedia. Wikipedia is considered to be a scholarly pursuit. The commentary and criticism is on the genre of magazine that each of these magazines is within, and may also be commentary or criticism about the content of any one of these magazines, their genre, and the content within in regards to the genre.

Consider that the image is of one page of a magazine, the cover page only, and contains none of the content within the magazine. The purpose of the cover is to advertise the magazine and its content. Display of the magazine cover alone in the context of Wikipedia, for the purpose of comment and criticism on the genre of the magazine, Pornography, does not impair the market for the original work, and may possibly even stimulate the market, or have no impact on the marketing of that specific magazine.

Using the criteria of the U.S. Copyright office, my four factor analysis of this use follows:

1) Purpose and character of the use:
 * "Statutory uses, criticism, comment, and/or news reporting"
 * Non-Commerial use, not for profit.

2) The nature of the copyrighted work
 * The copyrighted work is published, and is factual in nature. It is non-consumable.

3) Amount and substantiality of the portion used
 * Small excerpt, extract or clip.
 * only a small portion needed for favored purpose, not the entire work, nor the portion used as the "heart of the work".

4) Effect on the potential market for or value of the work
 * "Use stimulates market for original work, no impact on market"
 * "No licensing/permission mechanism in place"
 * Does not impair the market for the original work.

Based on these criteria, It is my opinion that use in this article within Wikipedia in the limited scope it has been used is within fair use of the U.S. copyright law.

Atom (talk) 16:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * But the image is tagged with a Creative Commons tag. No claim of fair use has been made.  Rossrs (talk) 23:02, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * A problem which I have remedied. Note, however, that the GFDL license template needs to remain on the image, to the extent that the arrangement of magazines or other elements of the image are copyrightable by the photographer. John254 00:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, and I'll leave it for the community to decide from here on, but one point - in the fair use rationale album covers are given as a kind of analogy, but the use of album covers is generally limited solely to the article on the album. Uses in a wider context are usually removed.  If you took a picture in a record store and got a bunch of random album covers, you couldn't then use the image at a generic article like "albums" or "record store" or "recording industry"  because there is no specific relevance for any of the individual covers.  Each album cover would be subject to its individual copyright, and the fair use claim would need to address each cover.  Likewise the list of magazine covers contained within the fair use rationale which you've added to the image description page should point to specific articles (I didn't check them all but the ones that I checked all did.)  The use here is completely different - none of the individual issue covers of the magazines shown, are independently significant or independently discussed in the article.  In my opinion this type of use is not covered by our fair use policy, but as I said, I'll now leave that for others to determine. I suspect that the inclusion of the fair use tag only means that this should be taken from this forum, to the images for deletion forum, but I don't think it's solved the problem. Rossrs (talk) 06:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Where do we draw the line though? Do we have to remove photos that include cars or buildings, because the design on those is owned by someone? I'd be curious to know if this issue has come up before, or even if there is an official Wikipedia policy on it ... given how far-reaching this issue is, it seems like there should be. Mdwh (talk) 18:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe that you could use an image of some album covers under fair use, if used properly. But, not randomly.  For instance an article discussing the genre of rock and roll, and a picture of some rock and roll albums, or an article about album art.  Under copyright, use for discussion or criticism of the genre as well as the specific album, or in this case the genre of pornography, are allowed fair use.  Also consider the variety of other fair-use factors, such as whether the use is likely to impair the market for the orginal work, or the whether the use is some small piece of a larger work, or a copy of the entire work.  In this specific case, the picture of the magazines does not, individually, impair the market for any one magazine, nor is the cover image an overly/unnaceptabbly large part of the total work. Atom (talk) 20:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.