Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles and content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Media copyright questions
Shortcuts

Welcome to the Media Copyright Questions page, a place for help with image copyrights, tagging, non-free content, and related questions. For all other questions please see Wikipedia:Questions.

How to add a copyright tag to an existing image
  1. On the description page of the image (the one whose name starts File:), click Edit this page.
  2. From the page Wikipedia:File copyright tags, choose the appropriate tag:
    • For work you created yourself, use one of the ones listed under the heading "For image creators".
    • For a work downloaded from the internet, please understand that the vast majority of images from the internet are not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. Exceptions include images from flickr that have an acceptable license, images that are in the public domain because of their age or because they were created by the United States federal government, or images used under a claim of fair use. If you do not know what you are doing, please post a link to the image here and ask BEFORE uploading it.
    • For an image created by someone else who has licensed their image under an acceptable Creative Commons or other free license, or has released their image into the public domain, this permission must be documented. Please see Requesting copyright permission for more information.
  3. Type the name of the tag (e.g.; ((Cc-by-4.0))), not forgetting (( before and )) after, in the edit box on the image's description page.
  4. Remove any existing tag complaining that the image has no tag (for example, ((untagged)))
  5. Hit Publish changes.
  6. If you still have questions, go on to "How to ask a question" below.
How to ask a question
  1. To ask a new question hit the "Click here to start a new discussion" link below.
  2. Please sign your question by typing ~~~~ at the end.
  3. Check this page for updates, or request to be notified on your talk page.
  4. Don't include your email address, for your own privacy. We will respond here and cannot respond by email.
Note for those replying to posted questions

If a question clearly does not belong on this page, reply to it using the template ((mcq-wrong)) and, if possible, leave a note on the poster's talk page. For copyright issues relevant to Commons where questions arising cannot be answered locally, questions may be directed to Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright.

Click here to start a new discussion

Click here to purge this page
(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)


adding images of artwork

Hello, my article Peter Kapschutschenko was just published but I want to add images of his artwork. I have images and permission from the museum that owns the artwork, but I don't have any contacts at the artist's estate. I also have my own photos of his public monuments but I understand they have to be 150 years old to publish. Any suggestions on the best way forward? never uploaded images before. Many thanks Djarmacost (talk) 19:05, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Djarmacost: There is not much you can do because his work is copyright until 2077 and only his heirs could release his work freely. Being artistic works the photos would also have to be freely licenced. Also for sculptures, if they are in Ukraine or the USA, there is no freedom of panorama for such works, so unless his work is displayed in a country where FoP is allowed, you are out of luck. As a long shot, the only possibility you have would be if you can write about his artistic style supported by appropriate reliable sources, an image might then be uploaded under our strict non-free policy WP:NFCC so long as there was critical commentary prose about the piece being shown. ww2censor (talk) 23:37, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding an Image

Hi all,

I would like to upload an image for an article that I am helping with, but I do not know how to do it properly. All of the licenses and such are very confusing, and I don't understand them. It is a picture of a person (the subject of the article). I could probably get permission from the owner of the image if need be, but would anyone be able to help me with this process?

Thanks, Bearcan (talk) 21:11, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bearcan: We have to get the image released under a free licence we accept, such as ((cc-by-sa-4.0)) but others are shown here WP:CC-BY. Commercial and derivative restriction are not acceptable. See WP:COPYRIGHT and this page shows how they can provide permission their WP:CONSENT. The subject of the image is usually not the copyright holder and only the copyright holder can give their permission unless it was transferred by legal means. ww2censor (talk) 22:11, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic Globe in Dresden

I got permission from a professor to post one of his images on a wikipedia page what I am working on. He gave me the citiation for the photo as well as the photo. what else do I need to do to upload it into my sandbox and after that onto the actual page? Catihill (talk) 00:34, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. That has the instructions for what needs to be done. Please be sure that your professor understands that the image needs to be released under a free license. -- Whpq (talk) 00:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Hi Catihill. There are a couple of things that you need to sort out with this image before you try to upload it.
The first one is who is the creator of the image. Since you posted that you got permission from a professor to post one of his images, let's assume that the professor is the copyright holder of the image and the work is 100% his own creation. In that case, the permission giving you permission to use the image on Wikipedia isn't really sufficient for Wikipedia's purposes. Rather, what is need is for the professor to give his WP:CONSENT to release the image under a free license that basically allows anyone anywhere in the world to download the image from Wikipedia at any time and reuse it for pretty much any purpose (including commerical and derivative uses); in other words, there's no way to restrict the image's use to "Wikipedia only" or for "educational use only" under the types of free licenses that Wikipedia accepts. You need to explain this to the professor and make sure he understands what giving his CONSENT means because the types of free licenses that Wikipedia accepts are, for the most part, non-revocable, and the professor won't really be able to stop others from reusing his image as long as they're complying with the terms of the license the professor has chosen. Moreover, it will be the professor's responsibility, not Wikipedia's, to enforce the terms of the image's license.
The next thing to determine is whether the image is 100% the professors own work. You've stated this is related to an "Arabic Globe in Dresden", but I'm not sure what that means. For example, suppose the professor went outside and photographed a sunset or painted an 100% original painting of a sunset; in either of those cases, the photo and the painting would be 100% the original work of the professor because a sunset in and of itself isn't eligible for copyright protection and the visual representation of the sunset is entirely based on the professor's own creative interpretation of what he saw. If, however, the sunset image created by the professor is based on or includes works created by someone else, then the copyright status of this other work also needs to be given consideration per WP:Derivative work. So, if the professor photographed the globe or painted a painting of the globe, then the copyright status of the globe itself probably needs to be considered if it was created by someone else. Now, it's quite possible that the globe is so old that whatever copyright it might have had has long since expired or the globe is so simple in design that it is considered to be in the public domain. On the other hand, if the globe is someone else's recent artistic creation, then that person might be able to claim copyright ownership over it and Wikipedia can't accept the professor's image without also getting the CONSENT of the globe's creator.
So, if you can provide a little more information about the professor's image and the globe, it might be easier for someone to help you determine whether it can be uploaded to Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:09, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does the File:U.S. Army Esports logo.png appear to be PD-USGov?

Does the U.S. Army Esports team logo appear to be PD-USGov? It was initially uploaded as fair use, but the question is if it's created by the U.S. Army as part of their official duties. I've initially retagged it, but I've reverted back just to stay safe, so I can discuss here. Also the current logo at i.e. official Twitter account may also be PD-USgov? Stylez995 (talk) 07:23, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amtrak Media "handout" images

Hello, I was wondering the policy for handling "handout" images on company media relations websites, in this case Amtrak: https://media.amtrak.com/media-images/

Here is the policy they post:

For any photographs, videos, news releases, and other posted Materials designated as “FOR MEDIA USE – SUBJECT TO LICENSE TERMS” (the “Licensed Materials”), subject to the terms of this Agreement, Amtrak grants you a limited, non-exclusive, royalty-free license and right to use, copy, republish, post and distribute the Licensed Materials provided that you: (a) include any proprietary and attribution notices of the Licensed Materials; (b) do not alter the Licensed Materials; and (c) use of the Licensed Materials is limited to media purposes. Except as provided herein, Amtrak and/or its licensors retain any and all rights, titles and interests in and to the Licensed Materials.

My guess is that this doesn't pass the threshold for a free enough license to be used on Wikipedia, but wanted to double check with editors more experienced in this area. Thanks in advance. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 02:48, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why did my flags with seals on them don't comply with criteria 3a?

Hello, I would like to ask as to why some of my flags which I labeled as non-free due to the inclusion of the seal, were labeled by a bot as non-compliant with non-free criteria 3a? How come some of mine are labeled like this while others are not? such as the flag and seal of Somerton, Arizona, which does not have a rationale of any detail at all. I would also like to mention why the Hinton seal doesn't meet criteria 3a because of the logo, which uses the seal on it, how does THAT work? What should I use to state that these use the seal without breaking criteria 3a? Advice would be greatly appreciated.

Here are the files File:Flag of Pike County, Kentucky.svg File:Flag of Rich Township, Illinois.svg File:Flag of Sykesville, Maryland.svg file:Flag of Westernport, Maryland.svg File:Seal of Hinton, West Virginia.svg Frank Zigler (talk) 15:43, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When the flag image is pretty much an exact replica of the seal image, then including both fail "minimal use" of NFCC#3a - we don't need both the flag and seal showing the same thing. And if we can use an image like Hinton's logo over the seal that otherwise contains the seal image, we want to go with the more complex image. Masem (t) 15:53, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case, how come Somerton, Arizona's flag and seal which both show the same thing is exempted from this? Frank Zigler (talk) 16:30, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It shouldn't, the flag/seal has the same problem that we only need one of those. Masem (t) 16:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, Also I would like to ask if what Jack Ryan Morris has done with the flag and seal of Joliet is okay? Where he made the seal non-free, but the flag as free media. Is this a loophole around criteria 3a? Frank Zigler (talk) 16:44, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Frank Zigler. There's no loop hole and the Commons file (i.e. the flag file c:File:Flag of Joliet, Illinois.svg) has since been deleted by a Commons administrator as a copyright violation. You will have to ask the person who uploaded the file why they did what they did to be sure, but it could've just been a misunderstanding of how copyright works. Lots of files get uploaded to Commons each day and quite a number of them will eventually end up deleted for licensing related issues. Since there's no vetting of uploads, it can sometimes take a while to find them. Often, it takes someone such as yourself asking questions like you did above to bring such files to the attention of others. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:07, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So, I can't even upload flags which are just seals on a bed sheet? How come Tacoma, Washington is allowed, do I need to go on about how stupid this criteria 3a feels when it comes to local insignia. It is, it really freaking is. Tell me, what is the real reason with criteria 3a, and why is this being used on against flags with seals on them, just why? I do not feel like breaking the rules just so I can represent a city that wants people to know their flag exists, and some people from those places probably want to know as well and they want the easy answer on where to find it, Wikipedia. Is this the "free" encyclopedia that was envisioned? I used to do what he did, and I made this account so I can learn and respect the copyright of these flags. I probably am making no points right now, right? Frank Zigler (talk) 23:13, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP's goal is to be a freely distributable encyclopedia, and thus we want to minimize how many non-free images that are used. That includes using two or more images that essentially represent the same thing, just because one is a seal and one is a flag, for example. Masem (t) 00:13, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
explain why Tacoma, Washington is exempted from this, explain it. Also I will not stop uploading those seal on a bedsheet flags. I don't oppose criteria 3a on every level, but when it comes to municipal seals or flags, I don't care if they mean the same thing, They are both equally important to the community, they still create pride for those communities, and what I think this does is suppress that. I look at it in the perspective of the community and it's people. I believe it should be exempted, at least I respect copyright of these seals and flags and didn't upload them on commons. Frank Zigler (talk) 01:00, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since non-free content also isn't vetted before it's uploaded, problems with such files often aren't noticed until someone mentions them in some discussion. The Tacoma files aren't exempt; it's that nobody familiar with the relevant policy seems to have noticed them before as explained in WP:NOBODYCOMPLAINED or WP:OTHERIMAGE. Even though the files are slightly different, there are still WP:NFCC#3a concerns that would probably be a good idea to discuss at WP:FFD. As for how important these files might be to their respective communities, that might be true in a sense, but it's not really relevant to Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. If you feel an exception should be made to NFCC#3a for this type of non-free use, you can propose such a thing at WT:NFCC to see whether a WP:CONSENSUS can be established in favor of doing so, but you can't really "declare" such an exception yourself with edit summaries like this or posts like the above. Eventually an approach such as that is going to be seen as WP:DISRUPTIVE and will probably lead to your account being blocked. NFCC#3a has been similarly applied to other types of non-free files in the past for basically the reasons given by Masem above for quite a long time now; so, I think it you're going to have difficultly carving out an exception for just these types of files. You can try of course, but you should do that on the talk page of the relevant policy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:57, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Categories