Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2008 October 7



Image:Helene Whitney1a.jpg
There is no credible evidence that the uploader owns the copyright to this image Asher196 (talk) 03:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Dymo product.JPG
No evidence that User:Builtbyanimals officially represents DYMO corporation, or that the image was otherwise released under the GFDL. dave pape (talk) 00:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Sdc-painting-FITH 063.jpg
Photo of painting at Fire In The Hole (Silver Dollar City), which was built in 1972. Painting is likely to be copyrighted (it could be PD, but we'd need some proof). dave pape (talk) 00:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:CARICMOLD.JPG
If the image was placed in the public domain by the author (Valentin Stratan), then there should be an OTRS ticket for it, me thinks. VG &#x260E; 00:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:DeNep4.jpg
Looks a non-free screenshot from an anime. Orphaned. OsamaK 11:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Diyitech8.jpg
Created by Diyi Technology int., as printed on the photo. Wrong license, Orphaned. OsamaK 11:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Forumsix.jpg
Same as. OsamaK 11:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Diyitech2.jpg
Same as. OsamaK 11:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Etr_site_logo.jpg
Non-free logo, copied from this link. OsamaK 12:05, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * per PD-textlogo. Stifle (talk) 10:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Habboguuuest.PNG
Looks a non-free screenshot of a game/software. OsamaK 14:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jovan_Fleming_Trinidadian.jpg
Well known Windows XP background. OsamaK 15:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:LOTXAF.jpg
Looks a non-free (film?) cover. OsamaK 15:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lanier_Highhool_Aerial_Photo.JPG
It is not uploader's work. Mostly it is taken from Google Earth, which is non-free. OsamaK 15:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Marl-microwave80s.jpg
Taken in 80s, Mostly it is not the uploader creation. OsamaK 16:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Marilogo-.jpg
Non-free logo. OsamaK 16:08, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Texas-Tech-University-logo.png


Image meets threshold of originality and therefore cannot be PD-text. Should be a Non-free logo tag.  MBisanz  talk 17:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Be specific. In what ways does it meet the "threshold of originality"? What are you using as your guideline when making that assertion? Most copies of the image bear the trademark logo. I have not seen any that bear the copyright logo. →Wordbuilder (talk) 18:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices states, in part:
 * "[R]egistration cannot be based upon the simplicity of standard ornamentation such as chevron stripes, the attractiveness of a conventional fleur-de-lys design, or the religious significance of a plain, ordinary cross. Similarly, it is not possible to copyright common geometric figures or shapes such as the hexagon or the ellipse, a standard symbol such as an arrow or a five-pointed star. Likewise, mere coloration cannot support a copyright even though it may enhance the aesthetic appeal or commercial value of a work."
 * It further states:
 * "[T]he copyright claim cannot be based solely upon mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring. Likewise, the arrangement of type on a printed page cannot support a copyright claim."
 * The law indicates that text ornamentation, coloring, etc. cannot, by themselves, be used to claim copyright. Therefore, the current tag used is the correct one. →Wordbuilder (talk) 13:57, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm convinced by Wordbuilder's arguments here. Shadowing on letters is a standard font practice and not creative. IronGargoyle (talk) 22:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, I think this is sufficiently original to attract a copyright claim. Stifle (talk) 10:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sufficiently original based on what? Coloring? Shading? Typographic ornamentation? Arrangement of of type? That's all I see in the image of two T's stacked on top of each other and all of those things are specifically listed as reasons why an image is not protected by copyright. Trademark, yes, but not copyright. →Wordbuilder (talk) 13:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I suggest listing this at WP:IFD for better discussion. Stifle (talk) 10:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Note to closing admin: Although I feel the image is free based on copyright law, if the consensus is delete, please notify me and I will restore Template:Non-free logo to the image. Vestigial fair-use rationals are already in place. →Wordbuilder (talk) 14:35, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a legal question, and not a topic for a !vote. As such, it should go to a professional (IP lawyer). Hobit (talk) 02:39, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That said, by my (non-professional) reading of the law, this is likely not copyrightable. So keep.  But I think this issue should be sent to the lawyers. Hobit (talk) 02:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bse.JPG
Appears to be an official logo of sorts, I doubt the uploader is the copyright holder. J Milburn (talk) 19:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If it is not cropped from the header at http://www.bse.hu/, it is surely a derivative. —teb728 t c 21:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bse2.jpg
Low resolution shot, uploaded along with another suspicious image. I suspect this was taken from another website. J Milburn (talk) 19:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Exact same file is at http://www.bse.hu/topmenu/about_us/introduction. --dave pape (talk) 19:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Unstoppable DeLon Album.jpg
Album cover- uploader is unlikely to own the rights to the image. J Milburn (talk) 20:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)