Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2016 February 16



Two files

 * 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 discussion was: delete. — ξ xplicit  01:20, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * File:Ram Kamal Mukherjee.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).
 * File:Ram Kamal Mukherjee Picture.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).

Two copies of the same file. Sourced to Google, without evidence of permission. The uploader claims to be the subject of the photograph (Ram Kamal Mukherjee). As there is no evidence that the uploader is the photographer (Vickky Idnaani), the uploader needs to ensure that the photographer provides evidence of permission. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:27, 16 February 2016 (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:Beparoyaa Poster.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 discussion was: convert to fair use. — ξ xplicit  01:20, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * File:Beparoyaa Poster.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Poster. Unlikely to be own work by the uploader. Stefan2 (talk) 09:29, 16 February 2016 (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:Gurinder Seagal.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 discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  05:03, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * File:Gurinder Seagal.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * This is claimed to be a selfie of a person called Gurinder Seagal. On File:Ram Kamal Mukherjee Picture.jpg, the uploader claims that he is called Ram Kamal Mukherjee. There is no evidence that the uploader is Gurinder Seagal. Stefan2 (talk) 09:30, 16 February 2016 (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:Debojit Saha Picture.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 discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  05:03, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * File:Debojit Saha Picture.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Looks like a screenshot of a TV programme, and the text Aakash Aath Channel's Programme on the file information page also suggests so. No evidence that the uploader is the photographer. Stefan2 (talk) 09:31, 16 February 2016 (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:ArmandAssante-Belarus.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 discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  03:03, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * File:ArmandAssante-Belarus.JPG ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * If the image is copyrighted, as the uploader writes in its description, we can't use it. We have a free image, File:Armand Assante Za misli.jpg GRuban (talk) 15:07, 16 February 2016 (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:Benton Jennings.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 discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  03:03, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * File:Benton Jennings.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * EXIF data clearly shows "David Beeler Photography". Text suggests uploader is the subject NOT the photographer, and no formal evidence of copyright transfer Ron h jones (Talk) 20:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I am sorry, but you obviously have NO idea of the world of show business, actors and their headshots, or entertainment law. The file (photo)is MY property. The fact a photographer was hired to take the photo does not preclude MY ownership. Ninety3rd (talk) 06:25, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If a photographer was hired, then the photographer is the copyright holder. You need to obtain permission from the photographer. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:29, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, that may fall under "work for hire" and the photographer may not be the copyright holder then. I guess it would depend on the exact details of the hire contract, though. So we'll need some assurance that the copyright was transferred.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The photograph only counts as a "work for hire" if the photographer was an employee of the uploader. In most cases, the photographer is instead a contractor of the uploader, and in those cases, the photograph is not a work for hire. It is typically too much trouble to sign an employment contract, go through a lot of bureaucracy and other things just so that the picture counts as a work for hire. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:12, 18 February 2016 (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.