Wikipedia:Using foreign images on Wikipedia

The following is a work in progress.

Wikipedia, a project of the United States based Wikimedia Foundation, is attempting to create a free content encyclopedia. In order to do this, Wikipedia must respect the relevant portions of United States copyright law that are applicable to any and all images Wikipedia wishes to incorporate. It is also the desire of Wikipedia's founder, Jimbo Wales, that Wikipedia respect (to the degree that is possible) the copyright laws of other countries when incorporating images originally published in those countries, even if Wikipedia is under no specific legal obligation to do so. This document discusses the status and usage guidelines specific to images published outside of the United States.


 * Related discussions:
 * Copyrights
 * Image use policy
 * Public domain

Legal status of foreign publications in the United States
The entirety of Unites States copyright law is embodied in Title 17 of the United States Code (17 USC). This code has been modified repeatedly to implement the United States' obligations under international copyright treaties, including the Universal Copyright Convention, the Berne Convention and the TRIPs Agreement. Though these and other copyright treaties have governed the development of US law, the treaties themselves have no specific force in the US, and only those provisions that have been implemented in Title 17 are enforceable in the US.

The United States approach to honoring its obligations under the Berne Convention is to grant most foreign works an identical degree and term of protection as would be offered to any comparable work published locally. Unlike many countries, the United States does not apply the "rule of the shorter term", meaning that a US copyright in a foreign work can persist beyond the expiration of the associated copyright in the country of origin. In addition, a work may be eligible for copyright protection in the United States even if it would not be eligible for protection in the country where it was first published.

The only exception to this is a provision of the Uruguay Round Agreement Act (URAA) meant to implement the TRIPs Agreement in the US. The idea is essentially as follows. Prior to 1989, certain formal requirements (principally display of copyright notice and registration and renewal with the Copyright Office) were required for a work to gain and retain copyright. When those requirements were lifted effective 1 January 1989, works that were in the public domain for failure to comply with these formal requirements were not retroactively restored copyright.

However, effective 1 January 1996, certain foreign works were retroactively restored copyright, given several conditions. First of all, they must have lost it for failure to comply with those requirements (or one of a few other things that will be dealt with later to the extent they're relevant). Second of all, the nation must either adhere to the Berne Convention, or be a member of the World Trade Organization, or be subject to special presidential proclamation. And third, significantly for the purposes of this page, their copyright in their home country cannot have expired as of the date of restoration for that country. Dates of restoration are as follows:

Essentially, if a foreign work's copyright had expired in its home country by the appropriate date, and it was first published in an eligible country, and it was not published in the United States within thirty days of its first publication, and it did not comply with U.S. formalities when it was published (for instance: not displaying copyright notice, not registering with the Copyright Office, or not renewing a registration), then it will be in the public domain in the United States as well. If any one of those points is not applicable, then copyright in the work's home country is irrelevant to us (although it should be noted anyway, for the sake of reusers in other countries).

Certain existing nations, including Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Iran, Iraq, and San Marino, presently have no copyright relations with the U.S. Works from those countries could be used without infringing copyright in the U.S.; however, Wikipedia policy is to respect works of those countries regardless (according to their laws or ours? see talk).

Respecting foreign copyrights
Though not bound by it, image use on Wikipedia should show respect for foreign copyright laws. Images published solely outside the United States should not be used in Wikipedia unless their use is consistent with both US law and copyright law in their country of origin. In most, but all cases, images in the public domain in the US will also be in the public domain in their country of origin. More complicated are images used on Wikipedia under the concept of fair use (see: Fair use). It is strongly preferred that the use of foreign images on Wikipedia under the theory of US fair use also be acceptable in the country of origin under a theory of fair dealing (or other similar local principle).

On Wikipedia, a presumption is given that any image used commercially in the US will have been properly registered and renewed pursuant to copyright law, unless evidence to the contrary can be provided. In the context of the URAA rules discussed above, an image in the public domain in a foreign country should not be assumed to be in the public domain in the US if it has ever been part of a commercial product that appeared in the US.

Foreign copyright tags
In order to explain the copyright situation of foreign images in their country of origin, a foreign copyright tag may be added to the image. All such copyright tags should clearly indicate that they describe the copyright situation in a foreign country. Unless the relevant terms are equal to or exceed US rules, the status of an image in a foreign country does not intrinsically show it to be usable under US law. A foreign copyright tag should be accompanied with an explanation of why the image is believed to be acceptable under US law. If an image is not provided with an appropriate license explaining its position under US law, it may be deleted.