Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2016 January 20



File:Linusholdinghdd.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: Wrong forum. The file is on Commons. Please nominate it for deletion there if you feel it is non-free. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:04, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * File:Linusholdinghdd.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * Taken from a copyrighted video on Youtube (watch?v=IIH3wg7yqnw). Unusual image choice, caption was a joke. Overall credibility questionable. Melonbob (talk) 03:15, 20 January 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:Birchenough-bridge.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 ⚡  07:04, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * File:Birchenough-bridge.jpg ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * No proof that this is free in Rhodesia. Steel1943  (talk) 05:05, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Government works are protected for 50 years from publication in the United Kingdom, and this rule is usually also used in former British colonies, but with exceptions. If that rule is used in Zimbabwe, then the file is free in Zimbabwe but still copyrighted in the United States. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:39, 21 January 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:Fraternity Network.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 discussion was: Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  07:04, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * File:Fraternity Network.png ([ delete] | talk | [ history] | [ logs]).


 * I stumbled across this from Talk:Social_network_change_detection, where the uploader states "Since we have permission to access to this paper freely, and I noted that the author is McCullon as well as the link to the .pdf file, I believe it is legal", and also discusses rather arbitrarily placing a CC BY-SA tag and misunderstanding how licenses work. Then again, there's a small chance this could be PD-ineligible as too simple (but I'm not a lawyer), but in any event, the current CC BY-SA tag is wrong. Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 22:55, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Not a good case for PD-ineligible there in my opinion; too much of what is there (disposition of the lines and dots mainly) seems like it'd be creative and could create a legit claim of copyrightability.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:18, 29 January 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.