Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2009 July 7



File:Sleepertruck1.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  08:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Given that the uploaders other sleeper truck images were copyvios and this one is of small size with no meta data, likely also to be a copyvio. Polly (Parrot) 02:03, 7 July 2009 (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.

File:Tornado intercept vehicle mark 2.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  13:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Image is incorrectly marked as public domain because its copyright has expired "100 years after the death of the author"; it's actually a frame from a 2008 television trailer. We can't use the frame in fair use, as the article is about the vehicle, rather than the TV trailer. McGeddon (talk) 09:49, 7 July 2009 (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.

File:United States ten dollar gold certificate.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media 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 discussion was: keep w/license as updated. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC) This has a fair use rationale, a PD template, and a non-free tag. At least one of them must be wrong. Stifle (talk) 14:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the uploader was just being cautious due to the confusing wording on the currency template. U.S. Currency (with the exception of those new 50-state quarters and such) is in the public domain. IronGargoyle (talk) 21:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I originally uploaded the image with a non-free tag (I wasn't quite sure if it was PD).Quadell reviewed this image, along with others, for me that are used on the Lindbergh kidnapping article. He added the PD template upon his review but didn't remove my original non-free tag. I've now removed the non-free tag and I'm sorry about the mixup.Shinerunner (talk) 22:16, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This image is currently tagged as non-free. If there is a dispute with the rationale, please tag the image with dfu or list it at WP:Non-free content review. Otherwise, unless there is another reason for listing here, the listing will be closed by an administrator and the image kept. AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:05, 8 July 2009 (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 media's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Xiomara de zelaya.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  08:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Source listed is commercial, uploader unlikely to be the copyright holder. Polly (Parrot) 17:12, 7 July 2009 (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.

File:Aguasocaña.jpg

 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  08:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Source listed is commercial, uploader unlikely to be the copyright holder. Polly (<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>) 17:14, 7 July 2009 (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.

File:Porfiriolobososa.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  08:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Source listed is commercial, uploader unlikely to be the copyright holder <b style="color:green;">Polly</b> (<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>) 17:14, 7 July 2009 (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.

File:Comisionadovicepresidente.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  08:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Source listed is commercial, uploader unlikely to be the copyright holder <b style="color:green;">Polly</b> (<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>) 17:16, 7 July 2009 (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.

File:Elvinernestosantos.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  08:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Source listed is commercial, uploader unlikely to be the copyright holder <b style="color:green;">Polly</b> (<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>) 17:17, 7 July 2009 (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.

File:Season3concertphotoit'sallrighthere.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  21:05, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Has a free license on Flickr but image is likely a screenshot, small size, no meta data. Flickr uploader is unlikely to hold copyright. <b style="color:green;">Polly</b> (<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>) 19:17, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know. I'm inclined to assume good faith on this one unless you can provide a source that this is infringing. The photos are taken from an audience perspective, and don't look like screenshots to me. No other suspicious images in the Flickr user's photostream. IronGargoyle (talk) 22:04, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not a good website, but I know it's the official press release for the concert taping. It states that no camera or recording devices were allowed at the concert. I'm not sure if this means that any pictures taken are a copyright infringement, so I don't know. I will try to find a better website with that press release, but all the websites with information about the season 3 concert taping have that same information.--Rockin56 (talk) 02:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Disallowing cameras and recording devices is an adhesion contract that the photographer broke. That said, it doesn't affect the validity of the licensing itself. The photographer would simply be in breach of that contract. IronGargoyle (talk) 18:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Disregarding my last comment, I think that the picture is a cropped version of a professional picture taken from the concert by a photographer for Disney Channel and used for press. Here is a link to the picture's caption box from disneychannelmedianet.com, Disney Channel's press website. --Rockin56 (talk) 18:37, 8 July 2009 (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.

File:Season3concertphoto.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  21:05, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Has a free license on Flickr but image is likely a screenshot, small size, no meta data. Flickr uploader is unlikely to hold copyright. <b style="color:green;">Polly</b> (<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>) 19:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * See my comment above. IronGargoyle (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * See information on the one above since this picture is from the same concert.--Rockin56 (talk) 02:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This picture is a cropped version of a professional picture taken by a photographer for Disney Channel and used for press, not by someone in the audience. Here's a link to the picture's caption box at disneychannelmedianet.com, Disney Channel's press website. --Rockin56 (talk) 18:40, 8 July 2009 (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.

File:J R Jayewardene.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  08:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Seems to be from http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~lkawgw/appreciation06.htm

Uploader claims this is own work, unlikely since (1) subject died in 1996, but uploader user page states they are a college student; (2) high quality photograph only uploaded at a low resolution. TheGrappler (talk) 19:48, 7 July 2009 (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.

File:Eagles alternate logo.gif
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 discussion was: Keep. Indidvidual letters of the alphabet can't be copyrighted, however artistically represented. +Angr 10:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

This is not just a word or two in a standard font. This is a stylised shape resembling an E, easily recognisable as the logo of the team. J Milburn (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a single letter in a stylized font. Other letters in other logos form the complete words; the error probably comes from the fact there is no option during upload for trademarked, but not copyrighted, images. Be warned, another one will soon follow. Just give me a chance to fix the error in labeling. — BQZip01 —  talk 22:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You've missed my point. This is copyrighted. J Milburn (talk) 00:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No, it isn't. They are characters from a typeset. Letters CANNOT be copyrighted in this manner. See discussion on J Milburn's talk page for more. — BQZip01 —  talk 06:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree completely with BQZip01. This is a character from a typeface and thus ineligible for copyright. I've seen a number of other cases like this and they have almost all closed as keep. The New York Yankees logo and Texas Tech logos are the first two that come to mind. IronGargoyle (talk) 18:07, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * What typeface is it? Stifle (talk) 21:22, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with Stifle's inference. If there's no typeface this is from, then it is not ineligible for copyright. That it is recognizable as a letter E doesn't clear it from copyright. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That it is a letter "E" makes it ineligible for copyright. Its intrinsic value as a letter, despite any artistic touches, makes it ineligible for copyright status. See PD and Template talk:PD-textlogo for more information. Also, here's one example of that letter in use as part of the Eagle's typeset . — BQZip01 —  talk 05:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I access that link and get "Forbidden". There's no evidence this is part of some typeface or font. You're claiming it's an Eagle's typeset. Evidence? --Hammersoft (talk) 13:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Link seems to work for me. Try this one.
 * "Under U.S. law, typefaces and the characters they contain are considered to be utilitarian objects whose utility outweighs any merit that may exist in protecting their creative elements. As such, typefaces are exempt from copyright protection in the United States". This isn't a matter of convenience, but of law. This "E" is part of a larger typeface and is simply excerpted from it.
 * The letters in them are characters of a typeset. Consider the following images:


 * Despite the obvious artistic input, these logos are still "set[s] of letters...whose forms are related by repeating design elements...intended to be embodied in articles, whose intrinsic utilitarian function is for use in composing text or other cognizable combinations of characters". Indeed, they are typefaces and thus, per the above, ineligible for copyright.  "Mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring" are not eligible for copyright protection.  — BQZip01 —  talk 15:09, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Once again, we disagree. Lather, rinse, repeat. I'm not going to waste more time attempting to convince you. Besides, this debate his horribly stale, and already archived without resolution. Bye. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If you do not wish to discuss it, then please don't bring it up for discussion. I understand you disagree with Wikipedia guidelines/policy, U.S. case law, and U.S. law. If you don't like it, I suggest you try and change it either on the appropriate guideline/policy talk page or through the court system. — BQZip01 —  talk 05:05, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * As I've said to you repeatedly (and your continued insistence that I hold a different position can be construed as disruptive) I do not disagree with Wikipedia guidelines and policy, nor U.S. case law or U.S. law. I am, as I noted before, not interested in trying to convince you. Regardless of what I say, we will disagree. It's a given. Since we're the only ones observing this now-archived page, it is a waste of time for you and I to debate this further. That is a perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The Coca-Cola logo is a bad example. It was copyrighted, but the copyright is expired because it was first published in the USA before 1923. This is a stylized letter and is eligible for copyright protection in the same way a calligraphic work would be. Delete. Stifle (talk) 10:37, 1 September 2009 (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.

File:John E Robinson.jpg
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #e5ecf5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid Gray;">
 * The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree image 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 by AnomieBOT ⚡  06:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No evidence the image was created by the US Federal Government, source link is to a commercial website. <b style="color:green;">Polly</b> (<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>) 22:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * keep I chose government because I wasn't sure which license to put this under. I knew as a mug shot it was public domain, but I wasn't sure which one it was. I could change the license, but I need to know which one is appropriate. <font style="background:#000000;color:#FFFF00">KMFDM FAN (talk!) 23:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Being a mugshot does not automatically make it public domain, only if it was the work of a US Federal Government agency would that be so. <b style="color:green;">Polly</b> (<b style="color:red;">Parrot</b>) 23:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought according to the Freedom of Information act, mug shots were Public Domain. <font style="background:#000000;color:#FFFF00">KMFDM FAN (talk!) 01:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope. Freedom of Information laws refer to access to information. They do not have any relation to copyright. Stifle (talk) 21:21, 29 July 2009 (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.