Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2008 April 5

< April 4	April 6 >

April 5

Image:April_tanhueco.jpg

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 00:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ArmchairCynics.jpg

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 00:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Aronberg_Head_Shot.jpg

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 00:39, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Arta_Bajrami.jpg

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 02:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons image showing through. -Nv8200p talk 04:25, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Artrockcircus.jpg

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 02:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ash-in-tempe-2005-charlotte-np-cropped.JPG

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 02:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason to believe she isn't. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image kept. Uploader seems to be the copyright holder according to user page.

Image:ChrebetWayne.JPG

Seems unlikely the uploader is the copyright holder — Winston365 (talk) 03:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IlgarinAzerbaijan.jpg

Watermarked, therefore unlikely uploader is the copyright holder. MER-C 11:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploaded is the same person nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission was given to the uploader Mspraveen (talk) 12:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture1067.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog1.com, the source does not exist. Furthermore, I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission was given to the uploader. Mspraveen (talk) 13:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture191.png

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaon1.com, the source does not exist. Furthermore, I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission was given to the uploader. Mspraveen (talk) 13:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture171.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog1.com, the source does not exist. Furthermore, I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission was given to the uploader. Mspraveen (talk) 13:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture161.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog1.com, the source does not exist. Furthermore, I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission was given to the uploader. Mspraveen (talk) 13:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture921.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission was given to the uploader. Mspraveen (talk) 13:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture351.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture311.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture41.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture7-1-.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture111.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture121.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture1234.png

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture1.1.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture151.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture61.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. Looking at http://www.gurgaonblog.com/about/ I don't quite see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Picture77.jpg

I don't quite think that this image is freely licensed. I don't think I see that neither the uploader is the same person of the blog source mentioned nor any CC-Attribution-ShareAlike permission seems to be given to the uploader anywhere. Mspraveen (talk) 13:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:At_wardernd2.jpg

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 13:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Authority_building_dawn.jpg

Watermarked image. Kelly ^hi! 14:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons image showing through. -Nv8200p talk 04:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Az2.jpg

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 15:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Azamk.gif

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 15:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Azoic1.jpg

No evidence uploader is copyright holder, watermarked image. Kelly ^hi! 15:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:B_Smith_2004_Water_Background.jpg

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 15:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:B-10.JPG

No evidence uploader is copyright holder. Kelly ^hi! 15:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Grundy-pigstore.jpg

No evidence that source granted permission to use the image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 16:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gx-9900-gb.jpg

The source this image was taken from is most likely not the copyright holder. Nv8200p talk 16:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Thenetwork2.jpg

Obviously not a user-authored image B (talk) 18:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Binkley.jpg

Obviously not a user-authored image. The uploader is 16 and was born about 12 years after this photo was taken. B (talk) 18:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dr. Mani Menon.jpg

Image taken from http://www.henryfordhealth.org/body.cfm?id=47772, which states "Photos: © Property of Henry Ford Health System Conrad R. Lam Archives, All Rights Reserved". Not clear that uploader has the right to license or release copyright ukexpat (talk) 19:39, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This image is a departmental image. It has been taken with full rights. The photographer is aware and had allowed this image to be used. Sciencefirst (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HORNAKPHOTO0001-small.jpg

No evidence uploader received permisssion to release the image under the GFDL. Nv8200p talk 20:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--This photograph of Ian Hornak was taken by John Huszar, whom the Estate of Ian Hornak has received permission for public use including for online purposes. slaenterprises —Preceding comment was added at 04:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Snappy-gum.jpg

Form of product packaging; no evidence that the uploader is copyright holder. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 21:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CarsonFunearal.JPG

Admitted scan from a pamphlet, therefore the uploader isn't the copyright holder and can't release it into the public domain. — One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed it to PD-Old, given that it dates from 1935. Hope this clarifies things. --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 13:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it doesn't. PD-Old is life of the author plus 70 years or less, and the photograph was taken 73 yars ago. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The photographer died in 1937. --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 14:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you prove that? Given you initially claimed to be the copyright holder (something you've done before, eg Image:E Powell 1.jpg), I'm not inclined to take just your word for it. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 15:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I get the death certificate from PRO for you ASAP. Can I email it to you though, I'm not sure I'd own the copyright of the photocopy! --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 15:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems awfully convenient. Before you've claimed to be the copyright holder of old photos, and that claim was proved to be bunkun. Then you upload this claiming to be the copyright holder, when it's clear you aren't. Then you claim PD-Old and when that's pounted out to be problematic you claim that the photographer died two years after the photo was taken. You've not got a track record of honesty have you? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 11:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a track record of getting an old press photo I had in a pile confused with one I may have take myself, big deal. Copy of death cert. has been ordered. --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 13:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Copy of death cert. has been ordered." Fucken lol. I don't believe you but that's bloody funny if it's true.