Wikipedia:Media copyright questions

Media copyright questions

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

(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)

File:1940 Dole ad Pineapple Bud O'Keeffe 1939.jpg

Could File:1940 Dole ad Pineapple Bud O'Keeffe 1939.jpg possibly be treated as {{PD-US-no notice}} given that US copyright law at that time required print advertisements to have visible and compliant individual copyright notices even when they were part of a another printed publication with its own copyright notice. Would the inclusion of a painting by Georgia O'Keefe in the advertisement affect the copyright status of the advertisement even though it's fair to assume that Dole had O'Keefe's consent to use the work and seems to have contracted her to paint it specifically for the advertisement? -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:31, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Covid-19-ct.webp

This is an image I uploaded back in 2020, which was before I really understand how non-free use rationales are supposed to be written. I came here to ask if it is sufficiently low-resolution to meet WP:NFCC#3b. JJP_Master (she/they) 19:51, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

The original source is doi:10.1148/ryct.2020200028 (appears to be figure 2e but a slightly different version from what is publicly available from the paper).

There is a note about the open-access terms that reads: "This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic or until permissions are revoked in writing. Upon expiration of these permissions, PMC is granted a perpetual license to make this article available via PMC and Europe PMC, consistent with existing copyright protections." However, I don't believe this qualifies as a free license. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 09:14, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

File:Logoantelogo.png

I don't think File:Logoantelogo.png is the uploader's "own work", but I'm wondering if it could be {{PD-logo}} or {{PD-ineligible-USonly}}. The file's being used in User:EternalBaile/xretinal; so, if needs to be treated as non-free, it can't be kept per WP:NFCC#9. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Sebastiano Piombo

Did he not die on June 27, 1547 - not 1546. According to The National Gallery, London and several printed articles? 2A00:23C8:476C:C600:DDA1:EF5E:8BBF:AB91 (talk) 11:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is a media-related question, but the article on Sebastiano del Piombo lists a death date of 21 June 1547, and this hasn't been changed in the past year. Where are you seeing the 1546 date? Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 09:20, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Question about F5 and CSD for orphaned images

If I replace a non-free image with another non-free image, is there a way to get the replaced image removed under CSD? I'd be doing everything under community consensus, of course. Departure– (talk) 17:03, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

The image would be in the scope of WP:F5, but would not be elegible for immediate deletion. You would tag it with {{subst:Di-orphaned non-free use}} and assuming no objections, it would be deleted in 7 days. -- Whpq (talk) 22:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi Departure–. Do you want to upload a new non-free image to replace a different non-free image currently being used in an article or do you want to upload a new version of an existing non-free image? WP:F5 applies to both cases but in slightly different ways. In the first case, you can add the template {{Orfud}} to the top of the page of file you removed and in the second case you can add {{Orfurrev}} to the top of the page of the file you updated. In the first case, please make sure to notify the uploader of the file so that they're aware that their file has been replaced and is no longer being used. It's also a good idea to use the syntax {{subst:Orfud|replacement=replacement file's name}} because it lets others know why the file is now "orphaned non-free use" and which file has replaced it; this gives them a chance to discuss things if they disagree with the replacement. F5 should really only be used when you think speedy deletion is going to be non-contentious; it shouldn't really be used to try and have a file deleted without anyone noticing just to avoid any discussion. So, if someone re-adds the file you've replaced, you should discuss things with them on the article's talk page, the file's talk page or at WP:FFD. The second case is almost always non-contentious, except perhaps when overwriting an existing file with one that's completely different; so, discussion is most likely not needed since the file isn't really being changed in anything other than a minor way like size reduction, cropping, straightening, etc. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:57, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

File:DawnBennettAtGoldenJoysticksLondon.jpg

On X, voice actress Dawn Bennett has asked for her photo to be changed, as well as for some edits to be made. She requested a photo of her from the Golden Joystick Awards in London to be used (source: https://x.com/DawnMBennettVA/status/1887395835480027340). This photo is available in her pinned post on X. Since she has given permission, and even requested its usage, I figured it was fair use, but I am unsure which tag to apply. Which tag should be used for this image?

CobaltYoshi27 (talk) 18:22, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

@CobaltYoshi27: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy pretty much never allows non-free images (i.e. fair use images) to be upload and used in articles about still living people; so, there's really no way to treat this file as such. What's going to be needed is for there to be some way for Wikipedia to verify that the copyright holder of the photo (which, in principle, is the person who takes it and not the subject of the photo) has given their WP:CONSENT. Only the copyright holder can give their consent and they need to do so it a very specific way. If you'd like to ask the copyright holder to give their consent for this photo, you can try WP:PERMISSION.The X post you've linked above is insufficient for such verification and some more specific is need; for example, Bennett can post a photo that they're the copyright holder of on one of her social media accounts and clearly state they're releasing the photo under one of the licenses listed at c:Commons:Creative Commons. Bennett needs to be as specific as possible about the type of license they're choosing, and can't just post "Go ahead" or "OK", or even "OK for Wikipedia". Bennett also should understand what it means to release a photo under such a license because it's really hard to undo later on. Another option would be for Bennett or the photo's copyright holder to email their consent to Wikimedia Volunteer Response Team so that they can verify their consent. It looks like the photo you uploaded wasn't taken by Bennett herself but rather someone else. So, unless that person transferred copyright ownership of the photo to Bennett, Wikipedia's going to need to verify the consent of who ever did take it in order to keep the file.

Finally, if you or anyone else is going to be making edits on Bennett's behalf based on requests made on X, you need to take a close look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and should ask Bennett to take a close look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Dealing with articles about yourself. Neither Bennett nor anyone editing on her behalf has any Wikipedia:Ownership of content over what's written about them on Wikipedia, and everything needs to be assessed in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:31, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

It turns out actually, I didn't know this at the time, it's her own photo and came from her phone's gallery. Since she has given permission and it turns out it is her own photo, what would then be the correct tag?

CobaltYoshi27 (talk) 01:09, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

​ Wikipedia needs to verify copyright holder WP:CONSENT in order to keep this photo. The copyright holder is, in principle, the person takes a photo not the person being photographed; so, even if someone else took that photo using Bennett's phone, the person who took the photo could be considered its copyright holder as explained in meta:Wikilegal/Authorship and Copyright Ownership#Who Owns the Copyright to the Photo If a Friend or Stranger Takes a Picture of You?. If Bennett is claiming to be the copyright holder of this photo, they need to formally verify that with Wikipedia. Bennett can do this by either clearly stating as much somewhere online as explained in c:COM:VRT#Licensing images: when contacting VRT is not necessary, or they can email Wikimedia VRT as explained in c:COM:VRT#If you are NOT the copyright holder. Verification by email is preferred if the photo has been published anywhere else (print or online) prior to Bennett posting it on X.

Only the copyright holder of a photo can choose how they want to release their photo; nobody else can pick a copyright license for them. Bennett needs to specifically state which license they want to release their photo under and Wikipedia needs some way of verifying this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:20, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

FYI: this image was uploaded before to Commons as c:File:Dawn M Benett Golden Joystick.jpg. I tagged it with "no permission", and deleted by someone else after a week. See my additional message to another uploader. Should we ever receive permission from the photographer via WP:VRT, the copy from Commons can be undeleted by an administrator. theinstantmatrix (talk) 21:16, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

@CobaltYoshi27: What Theinstantmatrix is a much shorter version of what I posted above. This particular file can't just be uploaded and used in the Wikipedia article about Bennett just based upon what she posted on X. Bennett (assuming they're really the copyright holder of the photo) needs to explicitly release it under one of the licenses released in accordance with c:Commons:Licensing. The easiest way for Bennett to do is probably going to be to send a c:COM:CONSENT email to Wikimedia VRT. Once Bennett's consent has been formally verified by VRT, the previously deleted c:File:Dawn M Benett Golden Joystick.jpg can be restored as explained in c:COM:REFUND. If that happens, the file then can be added to the Wikipedia article about Bennett. Bennett, bowever, needs to be sure this is what she wants to do because the types of licenses that Wikimedia Commons accepts for this kind photo are non-revocable and bascially allow anyone anywhere in the world to download the photo from Wikimedia Commons at anytime and resuse for any person; this includes derivative reuse, commercial reuse and even reuse in ways that Bennett mightn't want. What Bennett is essentially doing is giving everyone else permission in advance to do what they want with the photo as long as they comply with the requirements of the license Bennett chooses; moreover, if Bennett finds out someday that someone is not complying with the terms of said license outside of Wikipedia, it will be Bennett's responsibility (not the WIkimedia Foundation's) to resolve things. It's because of all of these things, formal verification of her consent is required. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:15, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

File:Li Hao murderer sex slave criminal.jpeg

In regards to the image [[:File:Li Hao murderer sex slave criminal.jpeg], the current image is a bit low quality in addition to being pillarboxed. The image in question is a screen capture of from CCTV (Chinese state media) 13's column "Legal Online" during their program in which they interview police regarding the subject of the photo. The screen capture is itself a recording of a detective's computer where they show the image they (the Luoyang Security Public Security Bureau) took of the suspect while interrogating them. You can even see the "t.jpg" in the broadcast and the Kylin window minimize/expand on the uncropped image. Also, the The original photo seems to have not been distributed, and all news outlets seemingly took only a screencapture of the original broadcast.

I would like to upload a screen capture of the original program (picture of the computer monitor), and then post an extracted version cropped in to show only the subject.

At a quick glance, per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/China, if the image is copyrighted by CCTV, it is definitely not be in the public domain. However, I am not certain if whether it is copyrighted by the Luoyang Security Public Security Bureau would that be OK under Template:PD-PRC-exempt (1) "laws and regulations, resolutions, decisions and orders of State organs, other documents of a legislative, administrative or judicial nature and the official translations thereof;". There is a much more exhaustive list of those related to those under the Chinese Communist party on s:zh:模板:PD-PRC-CPC

Of particular note is: 据2024年社群共识，国务院（及其组成部门和具有行政管理职能的直属机构以及法律规定的机构）

Or Translated: According to the 2024 Community Consensus, the State Council (including its constituent departments and institutions directly under it with public administration functions and institutions stipulated by legal provision).

And I do believe the Public security bureau falls under these guidelines. I do not know however if a recording an image displayed on computer is considered copyrightable. Can I have guidance on this?

Thank you for your consideration.

Johnkinslow (talk) 06:17, 11 February 2025 (UTC)