Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2015 May 15
May 15
[edit]- 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: 'Changed to non-free with a FUR. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 12:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- File:Jean Metzinger, Soldier at a Game of Chess, X-ray composite.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- While this is indeed a derivative work, it is sufficiently original to generate a new copyright - the given licensing tag reflects only the status of the original, and there is no evidence that the new work is available under a free license. A previously uploaded version under a different title includes a fair-use claim, but is now tagged for deletion since it has been replaced in the article with this version. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:48, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- This is indeed a derivative work. It is insufficiently original to generate a new copyright. Nevertheless, perhaps a compromise could included a fair-use claim and use rationale (in addition to the current license tag) for the X-rays superimposed on the original work. But I don't think that is called for in this case. Coldcreation (talk) 12:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- As mentioned at Talk:Soldier at a Game of Chess, the X-ray composite based on Jean Metzinger's Soldier at a Game of Chess is a derivative work, according to the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976, Section 101, based upon a pre-existing art reproduction, transformed, and adapted, which, as a whole, represents the original work of authorship signed J. Metzinger (lower right). This derivative work, composed by Adam Schwertner, Stephen Thomas, and Brian Callender, is subject to the same copyright laws as the original work of art. The overall composition is identical. The chessboard, the chess pieces, the background structure, the soldier's shadow, and the the artists signature are identical to the original work of art. The authors of the composite themselves (along with the Smart Museum of Art and the University of Chicago), have acknowledged that this image is "based on" Metzinger's painting. In the case under study here, all that was modified was the soldier, i.e., X-ray images were superimposed on top of certain parts of the original work. Coldcreation (talk) 12:46, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- So why not just copy the fair use rationale from one that's been replaced? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:47, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- I've gone ahead and done just that. As such, all the bases are covered, both for the Metzinger work upon which the derivative image is entirely based, and for the X-ray addition to the original work. Coldcreation (talk) 20:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- ...well then what was the point of uploading the replacement version at all? Anyways, that resolves the issue that this page addresses, as we are no longer incorrectly claiming that the work is free; the problems with the FUR can be addressed elsewhere. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
- I've gone ahead and done just that. As such, all the bases are covered, both for the Metzinger work upon which the derivative image is entirely based, and for the X-ray addition to the original work. Coldcreation (talk) 20:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- This is indeed a derivative work. It is insufficiently original to generate a new copyright. Nevertheless, perhaps a compromise could included a fair-use claim and use rationale (in addition to the current license tag) for the X-rays superimposed on the original work. But I don't think that is called for in this case. Coldcreation (talk) 12:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This image is currently tagged as non-free. If there is a dispute with the rationale, please tag the image with {{dfu}} or list it at WP:Non-free content review. AnomieBOT⚡ 21:12, 15 May 2015 (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.
- 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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:05, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- File:DanielKin1976movie.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Likely snagged from web source; claimed creation date is later than prior publication on other sources, e.g. [1] (ESkog)(Talk) 15:21, 15 May 2015 (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.
- 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 TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:05, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- File:Majorallstars15matches.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- Tagged as PD-text but appears to contain logos of several individual entities, which probably have rights to those logos. (ESkog)(Talk) 16:36, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- Well I kind of think the logos individually also seem like pd — Junchuann
05:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
- Well I kind of think the logos individually also seem like pd — Junchuann
- 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.
- 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 as F9 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 12:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
- File:Rep.Heaton.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
- The image is a version of the one from his indiana general assembly page. I think we either need a permissions email or confirmation otherwise that this image is freely licensed. Peripitus (Talk) 22:37, 15 May 2015 (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.