Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2007 February 5/Images
Images
- Image:Sigil-baphomet.gif (history · last edit) — I am not certain what URL this came from, but this image is copyright of Anton LaVey and has not been released into the public domain. The copyright is probably being renewed by the Church of Satan, but even if not, copyright has not yet expired as LaVey died only in 1997, and this image is almost assuredly not fair use in Template:Satanism. — coelacan talk — 21:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- The fact that it's LaVey's copyright, by the way, is discussed right in the text on the image page: "Image created by Anton LaVey (1930-1997), which is a modification of the Baphomet originally published in 1897 in the book "La Clef de la Magie Noire" by Stanislas de Guaita. This image is a religious symbol, whose original author is long dead, and is widely used by many in the occult world, as such it is not subject to copyright."[1] The uploader seems to have misunderstood that the old de Guaita version may be in the public domain, but LaVey's modification is new work and subject to his own copyright. It's used on the covers of his books. [2] [3] [4] [5] — coelacan talk — 03:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- The LaVey modification to the 100+ year old image is so closely matched that, that in itself, would have constituted copyright infringement if the 1897 image wasn't already in the public domain. There is no original artwork added to the LaVey version, rather artwork merely removed. Furthermore, the LaVey version of the baphomet is not eligible for copyright according to the USPTO's own standards for the reasons stated above. Going one step farther, you'll notice that in none of the aforementioned books you list is there a copyright asserted for the baphomet. Nor did Dr. LaVey himself ever proclaim that he was the copyright holder of the modified baphomet. Absinthe (Talk) 01:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, the Church of Satan explicitly claims copyright over this symbol. See http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/BaphometSigil.html which says "It should be noted that this version is a copyrighted graphic which belongs to the Church of Satan alone." and "If anyone wants to legally use our version of the “Sigil of Baphomet,” they may ask for permission, and we have generally been quite liberal in licensing people to use this for various projects and goods—though we usually only allow its use on websites when (and where) they are mentioning the Church of Satan. Otherwise, those wishing to use a public domain version of a goat / pentagram / “Leviathan” symbol must go back to the historically published sources, or they may take the challenge to draw a fresh one." But even if you did ask for their permission to use on Wikipedia, it's not just being used in articles on the Church of Satan, it's being used for articles on other competing organizations. And "permission to use on Wikipedia" is not acceptable licensing here. It's copyrighted, it's not being used according to fair use criteria, and so if you want to use it here you'll have to get the Church to release it under the GFDL or the CC-BY-SA or some other free license. — coelacan talk — 21:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- The LaVey modification to the 100+ year old image is so closely matched that, that in itself, would have constituted copyright infringement if the 1897 image wasn't already in the public domain. There is no original artwork added to the LaVey version, rather artwork merely removed. Furthermore, the LaVey version of the baphomet is not eligible for copyright according to the USPTO's own standards for the reasons stated above. Going one step farther, you'll notice that in none of the aforementioned books you list is there a copyright asserted for the baphomet. Nor did Dr. LaVey himself ever proclaim that he was the copyright holder of the modified baphomet. Absinthe (Talk) 01:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Image:Helmsbakeryphotobyirabrown.jpg (history · last edit) from [6]. —Angr 21:16, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
I uploaded this image after corresponding with Mr. Brown. Here's our email. Delete if this is not enough. jengod 15:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
from Ira Brown <ira.brown @ gmail.com> hide details 12/6/06 reply-to ira.brown @ gmail.com to mail @ jengod.com date Dec 6, 2006 9:42 PM subject [Flickr] Wikipedia photos mailed-by bounce.secureserver.net You've been sent a Flickr Mail from BinaryLA: ------------------------------------------------------------ :: Wikipedia photos Hi jennifer I upload the 49er picture to wikipedia and received credit. i did not upload the dingbat photo and it is mine but i did not receive credit. however, i would like the photo to remind and receive credit. I would like to upload more photos but have not had in luck figuring out the process. ira
- Image:Adampretty.jpg (history · last edit) from [7]. Balloonguy 22:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)