Wikipedia:Copyright problems

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Angela (talk | contribs) at 19:16, 19 August 2004 (Joinville). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut

WP:CP does not stand for Wikipedia:Community Portal.

This page is intended for listing and discussing copyright problems on Wikipedia, including pages and images which are suspected to be in violation.

If you list a page or image here which you believe to be a copyright infringement, be sure to follow the instructions in the "Copyright infringement notice" section below. Page titles should stay listed for a minimum of 7 days before a decision is made.

Pages where the most recent edit is a copyright violation, but the previous article was not, should not be deleted. They should be reverted. The violating text will remain in the page history for archival reasons unless the copyright holder asks the Wikimedia Foundation to remove it. See Wikipedia:Page history for details and Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations on history pages for discussion.

See also: Wikipedia:Votes for deletion, Wikipedia:Deletion policy, Wikipedia:Copyrights, Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations on history pages, Wikipedia:Image description page, Wikipedia:Request for immediate removal of copyright violation, Wikipedia:Confirmation of permission, Wikipedia:Sites that use Wikipedia for content, m:Do fair use images violate the GFDL?, m:Fair use, Wikipedia:Fair use, copyright

Alternatives

In addition to nominating potential copyvios for deletion, you could:

  • Replace the article's text with new (re-written) content of your own: This can be done on a temp page, so that the original "copyvio version" may be deleted by a sysop. Temp versions should be written at a page like: [[PAGE NAME/temp]]. If the original turns out to be not a copyvio, these two can be merged.
  • Write to the owner of the copyright to check whether they gave permission (or maybe they in fact posted it here!).
  • Ask for permission - see wikipedia:boilerplate request for permission, Wikipedia:Confirmation of permission

If you believe Wikipedia is infringing your copyright, you may choose to raise the issue using Wikipedia:Request for immediate removal of copyright violation. Alternatively, you may choose to contact Wikipedia's designated agent under the terms of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act.

Actions to take for text

Remove the text of the article, and replace it with the following: 

{{copyvio|url=<place URL of allegedly copied material here>}}

~~~~

Where you replace "<place URL of allegedly copied material here>" with the Web address (or book or article reference) that contains the original source text. After removing the suspected text violation add an entry on this page under the List of possible copyright infringements section.

Actions to take for images

If you suspect an image is violating copyright, add the following to the image description page: 

{{imagevio|url=<place URL of allegedly copied image here>}}~~~~

After adding the text to the image information page add an entry on this page under the List of possible copyright infringements section.

Amazon copyrights

An interest has been expressed in the Wikipedia community to use images from Amazon.com, particularly with regard to cover art from commercial music recordings (albums).

When approached about permission to use images from their site, Amazon.com's official response was that such permission simply wasn't theirs to give. They say that the copyrights still belong to the holders of copyrights in the original works.

At this time, there is no official Wikipedia policy for or against using Amazon.com as a source of images such as album cover art. Note, however, that Wikipedia copyright policy is still in effect—uploaded images' descriptions should still contain proper attribution, a copyright notice if copyrighted, and a fair-use rationale if fair use is being claimed. (Simply make sure that the copyright is attributed to the true copyright holder and not Amazon.com.) For specific guidelines on images and copyright, see Wikipedia:Copyrights#Image_guidelines.


Used with permission images

These are all "used with permission" images (or have no info as to source) and thus cannot be used by third parties, thus they are not in the spirit of the GNUFDL and hinder the redistribution of Wikipedia content. Jimbo Wales said we cannot use those type of images as a result. [1] --mav 21:04, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I note that some of these images merely require credit and do not otherwise restrict usage. Since we are required by the GFDL to maintain authorship information, I don't see how that is incompatible. —Morven 21:30, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in the process of removing those from the above list and re-classifying them as fairuse. --mav

Image:Amcoa.jpg Image:LondonEye1.jpg Image:BARBER01.jpg Image:Nokia-mobilephoneearpiece010.jpg Image:Belcourt.jpg Image:W D Hamilton.jpg Image:Ascaphus truei.jpg


Image:Peppered moth Biston betularia betularia f typica.jpg

This appears to be an accurate scientific photograph. Does anyone see any sign of artistic creativity in lighting or other aspects of the presentation? Recall that in the US there must be some creativity to have copyright. Jamesday 13:26, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]


Image:JohnBalance.png Image:JohnBallance.png Image:MichaelJosephSavage.jpeg Image:MichaelJosephSavage.png Image:NormanKirk.png Image:KeithJackaHolyoake.png Image:SirWilliamFergusonMassey.png

I was the one who uploaded the images of New Zealand prime ministers: Image:JohnBalance.png, Image:JohnBallance.png, Image:MichaelJosephSavage.jpeg, Image:MichaelJosephSavage.png, Image:NormanKirk.png, Image:KeithJackaHolyoake.png, Image:SirWilliamFergusonMassey.png, and one or two others. I did so with the explicit permission of the National Library of New Zealand, which holds the rights to those images. At the time, I believed that Wikipedia text and Wikipedia images were treated separately under our implementation of the GDFL. I based this on Wikipedia:Copyrights, which merely says (at the top) that the text of Wikipedia is under the GDLF. Looking at things more closely, however, I see that I was mistaken in my interpretations - the same page also says "We do not allow special permission content to be included in Wikipedia since such content cannot be used by downstream users of Wikipedia content unless they also obtain permission." As these images most definitely cannot be used by third parties without permission (or even on other Wikipedia pages without permission), they should be removed as quickly as possible - the National Library was very explicit on that point. The permission for using these images is null and void unless we can adhere to their terms, and it appears that we don't. It's unfortunate, since I think the images do improve the articles, but I suppose that's just how these things work. I apologise for my mistake. -- Vardion 00:24, 4 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
We all make mistakes - no big deal. :) I see they also claimed copyright to some public domain images. I fixed that since it is a bogus claim. We still might be able to use the images under the fair dealing/fair use doctrine. See Wikipedia:Fair use. --mav
When was each picture taken? Who took them and held the rights to them? At least one or two appear likely to be in the public domain, given the dates of death of the subjects. Jamesday 12:23, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]


Non-commercial use images

As of June 30, 2004, images where permission is granted for non-commercial use only are not allowed. This is official Wikipedia policy pronounced by Jimbo Wales. [2]. As a result, all of these images now need to be removed from any associated articles and deleted. Before they are deleted, we should evaluate whether we can justify their use on other grounds, such as fair use. --Michael Snow 21:22, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Just to clarify, we are not yet to the point where wholesale deletions and actions against this type of image are warranted. We are still not to a satisfactory point in image tagging, and we want to finalize the new upload form (and get it active), so that we can better manage change in the future. It is advised not to upload any new non-commercial images now, and to seek replacements for non-commercial images that we have, but for today anyway, I recommend against people trying to hunt these down and extinguish them. We are going to try to have a smoother transition than that. Jimbo Wales 15:23, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Pokemon images

The discussion on Pokémon images has been moved to Template talk:Pokeimage.

  • King Me'emen's Story from http://www.dnidesk.com/meemen_story_01.html -- Jim Regan 04:54, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • King Kedri's Story, from same source as above? RickK 05:13, Jun 27, 2004 (UTC)
    • In fact, see from User:Lovanion, which are mass importations of copyrighted pages from [3] or [4]. RickK 05:24, Jun 27, 2004 (UTC)
      • I exchanged emails with the webmaster of [5], and am told that all that material is actually copyrighted by Cyan Worlds Inc. (producers of Myst) and used by [6] and [7] with their permission. He gave me the name of the guy at Cyan who deals with this permission - since Lovanion claimed on his talk page to have permission to use this stuff, I have emailed the guy at Cyan to double-check that he is aware that this is for republishing under the GFDL, not just for putting up on a fansite. —Stormie 11:13, Jun 28, 2004 (UTC)
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vertreibung_2.jpg
    • This is unverified (I doubt the web page using it is the original copyright holder) but is highly political which I guess is why it ended up here. Unless someone can find out who it actually belongs to I don't see why it should be deleted above the other thousand unverified images. Secretlondon 23:32, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Swrdrose.JPG is a copy of the video box card for the Walt Disney film Sword and the Rose - No mention is made of copyright imagine it belongs to Disney Lumos3 15:30, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Someone will no doubt make a claim for fair use. Secretlondon 23:33, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)


  • Image:JC2004.jpeg is a glamour shot of Jennifer Connelly from http://www.maximonline.com. The Maxim copyright notice is on the image, no note about permission, and even if there was I doubt it would extend to sublicensees. - Eisnel 05:56, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • We have thousands of similar cases - and they are generally excused as being fair use. Someone who knows US copyright law better than me should look at it. Secretlondon 23:30, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
      • That is most definitely a copyvio. Fair use doesn't apply since it's a creative photo. It even says "All rights reserved" on the photo. You can't get more explicit than that. ☞spencer195 05:32, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Data recovery: parts are from [10]. Other parts may be original text. Samw 12:45, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • The whole text is from Infocog - but I wonder if this is a non compliant mirror. Some text also seems to be from [11]. Secretlondon 00:25, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • USAir Flight 427 from [12] Dunc_Harris|☺ 16:23, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • But this is a reprint of a document submitted to the US NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD - does that make it PD? Secretlondon 00:55, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Birkeneskommunevapen.gif - claimed fair use but no source was given Guanaco 02:36, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • This is a coat of arms - I don't know what our policy is on these. Secretlondon 01:25, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • This should be allowed under norwegian copyright law from 1961 per section 13 "Making Copies for Use in Educational Activities" as the and a possible source is [13]Jerven
    • one could try to mail postmottak@birkenes.kommune.no and ask them.
    • Fair use is allowed as a coat of arms is equal to legally to the name of the entity holding the coat. Eg. The coat of arms of the king's household is legally the same as writing that the king's household as a coat of arms serves an indentifying role not creative or artistic nor sceintific. [Jerven]
  • Consumer Health Informatics from [14] -- Hadal 10:17, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    The copyright holder apparently has given permission on the talk pages. Guanaco 04:02, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Flecainide -- Seems that this was copy-and-pasted from a number of different web pages. See the talk page for more information. Matt 15:33, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Older than one week

The scan is used in both the Heller and the scale model articles. That's within context. 213.51.209.230 16:31, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • The Sword of Shannara - reads like a copy, but I can't find it. RickK 23:37, Jul 11, 2004 (UTC)
  • Olympic Truce from [21] - likely posted by the same user as above. Text seems to be originally written by Greek ambassador George Savvaides (and it would therefore fall under his government's copyright, unless I'm mistaken). -- Hadal 07:09, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • On the talk the author has posted a question about the copyright status since s/he claims to be an author of the work. Unless someone decides to follow this up, the page should be deleted in a week or so. Maximus Rex 20:53, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Dentsu from [22] (according to vfd discussion on talk page) -- Graham ☺ | Talk 00:20, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • See Talk:Dentsu, author claims to be copyright holder. However if this turns out to be the case the page would need to be re-listed on vfd for content. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 09:55, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Baby k from [23] (PDF) and some other minor sources. andy 16:22, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • Author has replied on article's talk page. Rmhermen 22:19, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)
    • I restored article based on the author's claim of originality. Also I couldn't find any text from the alleged source. Did I miss something? Rmhermen 14:48, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Egale Canada from [24] and others - Lucky 6.9 18:23, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • Claims to be copyright holder on talk.Maximus Rex 23:09, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Common Alerting Protocol from [25]. Copyvio noted by User:Meelar, but not listed here? -Rlandmann 01:42, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Jules Dassin probably ultimately from the All Music Guide -- see Talk:Jules Dassin for more info. - dcljr 19:10, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • Hello? This entry has been languishing here for a month. I thought something would happen automatically after 7 days. The Jules Dassin article can now be replaced by the content of Jules Dassin/Temp (still a stub, but at least not a copyright vio). How is that done? - dcljr 00:02, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Legnica from [26], which claims to be from Encarta 2001. --Zigger 01:59, 2004 Jul 18 (UTC)
    • Can you double check? At a quick glance the content appears to be different. Maximus Rex 00:46, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

July 20

Uploader claims fair use. Lupo 12:11, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Lovcen from [28]. --Romanm 07:33, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • Maybe you didn`t know but that page is not copyrighted. In Serbia and Montenegro, nothing is copyrighted if you didn`t put the copyright sign. Law is different from the law in USA. Plus this page was made by Government, and by law , any information given or made by government is public. Conclusion is that this text is not copyright problem. If there is © sign means that webdesign is copyrighted. You can check by sending an email to webmaster. --[[User:Avala|Avala|★]] 10:13, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Cocktails Cachaca capirinha.png "non commerical only" according to uploader. Maximus Rex 08:15, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Not found on the internet, but since when do we delete "noncommercial use only" images? Lupo 12:11, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Estellawarren.jpg copyrighted image. Maximus Rex 01:42, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Contacting uploader(s). Lupo 12:11, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    Uploader claims fair use on his talk page. Needs a second opinion; i don't think this is "fair use". Lupo 12:26, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

July 21

  • Kermanshah from [29]. Roozbeh 10:51, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    The given extlink times out for me. Lupo 13:40, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Sanandaj from [30]. Roozbeh 10:51, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Copyvio notice has been overwritten. Revert/delete and make [[Roozbeh recreate the current stub? Too complicated; I'd just leave that one as it is now (a non-infringing stub with some copyvio in the history). Lupo 13:40, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

July 22

July 25

  • Image:SaddamBaghdadwalkabout.jpg from unknown Guanaco 04:23, Jul 25, 2004 (UTC)
    • Template:Iraqcopyright
      See my talk page for an attempt to decipher that. Lupo 20:37, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      Anthony appears to be correct for US reusers:PD in US. The status in each other jurisdiction would neeed to be determined. Assuming that this is a publicity image form theold government, the use here is likely to be in situations where the use is fair. Jamesday 04:27, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Oregon Illinois Public Library copied verbatim from [36]. Lupo 21:19, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Somebody claims to have permission. I'll follow up by e-mail. Lupo 08:04, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    No answer received until now; I think this can go. Lupo 09:37, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

July 26

  • Image:Persian Cat.jpg - No info on source and the photo looks like a professional shot Guanaco 00:23, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)
    Also used on the Polish Wikipedia (copied from en). Grayscale image. A hit-and-run by the uploader. Lupo 13:07, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Rowan University from [37] anthony (see warning) 20:35, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    Copyvio is in the history (the large anon contribution). What's the proper procedure: delete and replace by Anthony's replacement on the temp page (pre-copyvio version plus subsequent changes), thus losing the history, or simply manually removing the infringing parts? Lupo 14:10, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    The only history attribution that is lost is that of Maximus Rex, whom I have attributed in the comments, unless you're going to count HCheney's "Betty Castor, Florida politician and former president of the University of South Florida" as copyrightable. anthony (see warning) 13:37, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Guido Borelli copied verbatim from [38]. Lupo 21:23, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
    • True indeed!
      But as it happens to be his life and his biography written by Guido himself, I'm afraid it would be rather difficult to be too different, don't you agree? ;-) In any case, I've tried to change the text a bit and for sure Guido wouldn't raise any problems on the copyright of his biography!
      You can ask Guido directly.--E-worker 13:22, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      Guido Borelli himself claimed that the copied text originally was written by one Debra Nesta from a magaizine called "CT". The copyvio has since been overwritten and is now in the history; I propose no action. See also Talk:Guido Borelli. Lupo 07:30, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

July 27



July 30

July 31


August 2

  • Arthur Omar - can't find where it's from, but it reads like a copyvio. RickK 23:57, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)

August 3

August 4

  • Images of USPS postage stamps. I note from Domestic Mail Manual G013 section 2.0 and this page that "The designs of postage stamps, stamped envelopes, stamped cards, aerogrammes, souvenir cards, and other philatelic items issued on or after January 1, 1978, are copyrighted by the USPS under title 17 USC", and that there appear to be specific guidelines for the reproduction of stamp designs, as with the reproduction of U.S. currency. IANAL, but the casual use of postage stamps for illustrations should probably be discouraged. Tregoweth 23:08, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)

August 5

I have received permission for this text. Please see the article's talk page for details. ato 08:09, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I have restored the article. ato 01:15, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)



August 9

  • History of Singapore - too much lifted from [54] Alex.tan 07:14, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Ack. There have been many edits to the page in addition to the copyright violation. It would be nice if we could salvage some of it. I've put a note requesting such a rewrite in the talk page and on Wikipedia:Cleanup. If no one minds, let's give it another week before deleting. -- Infrogmation 16:30, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Philip Sidney - no source for reverted data online, but data was obviously taken from an academic paper that cited sources from the 1980s. Smerdis of Tlön 13:48, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC) + It is apparently from http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rbear/defence.html Smerdis of Tlön 14:24, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • The copied material was introduced in one swell foop by an anonymous editor very recently [55], pasting it onto the tail of the then-extant article. So can't we simply revert to the most recent non-copyvio version? Wile E. Heresiarch 20:03, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      • The old text now sits under the copyvio notice. This may have been the Wrong Thing. Smerdis of Tlön 16:08, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
        • Agreed, that is strange. Reverting to the most recent non-copyvio version will still work, though. Wile E. Heresiarch 18:31, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
          • Done. The request for confirmation, if it isn't a copyvio, remains in talk. Smerdis of Tlön 04:06, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • AA Grapevine from [56] - Lucky 6.9 22:46, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Someone ignored the instructions to draft a rewrite at the /Temp page, so now the copyvio is in the edit history. --Diberri | Talk 04:36, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

August 10

August 11

  • Stefan_Lazarevic - Second half from [79]. First half not found on Google, but reads like copyvio. 172.128.205.52 00:07, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Tony Knowles (politician) - Much of the page, including several randomly-selected sentences, appears to be modified from [80] (Google cache of Knowles's election campaign site). Jxg 01:41, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Jan Smithers mostly from [81] - Lucky 6.9 05:29, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Lincoln Versailles from [82] -- Hadal 06:31, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Confirmed with site owner that this was definitely submitted without his permission. Copyright violation for sure. —Morven 04:27, Aug 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • Ming W. Chin from [83] -- Wile E. Heresiarch 07:51, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Michael Lee-Chin - enormous text dump from [84] - Lucky 6.9 08:50, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Zizekbio.gif copied from [85]. HTML page of [86] says "Copyright © 2002-04 Trustees of Dartmouth College". --Romanm 11:38, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Erzurum002.jpg blatanly taken from the Encyclopaedia of the Orient and the user did not even bother to take off the top banner of the Encyclopaedia from the photograph. The site explicitly mentions that any material cannot be even started to be reproduced.--leandros 12:02, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Just noticed that the article text Erzurum Province is completely copied from the same page as the image.--leandros 12:07, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Many images by this user (User:Avnionur) are from municipalities' web pages in Turkey, which are copyrighted unless stated otherwise. The only case I think this is not true was Istanbul for which the logo is very old and it must have gone into PD under Turkish copyright law. I cannot check though. ato 05:10, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • I don't think using the logos of the municipalities are copyvios, although instead of using logos themselves, he uploads the banners containing the logos from the websites, but the images must be checked nevertheless, alongside the texts.--leandros 11:22, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      • I rewrote the article at its temp page. However, I have no idea on what to do to now to have the temp page the main article. Help anyone?--leandros 22:23, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Monicabellucci.jpg from IMDb. Lupo 12:20, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Cumbre Vieja from the abstract of a scientific paper, copyright most likely with the authors and the publisher. Paper at [87] (PDF). Lupo 12:52, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Kendryden.jpg from [88]. Lupo 13:17, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Prometheus class starship from [89]. Lupo 15:43, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Viola Spolin - credited at bottom of page as "Reprinted from Notable Women in the American Theatre Greenwood Press" - Lucky 6.9 16:55, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Viola Spolin back again, same user, this time from [90]. Has also created an enormous talk page about personal experience with this individual. Can someone have a friendly chat with this fellow? - Lucky 6.9 18:32, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Leo Buscaglia source on page itself is "From the book HOW TO GET A LIFE, edited by Lawrence Baines, Ph. D and Daniel McBryer, Ph.D, 2003" - Lucky 6.9 19:02, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Talk:Viola Spolin - should have known. It's from [91] - Lucky 6.9 19:06, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

August 12

August 13

August 14

I created a disambig page earlier today. Goldie is at Jeff Wilson (rugby player). Just checking backlinks. dramatic 09:14, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  • Miami Showband probably cut and paste from [131] but originally from the Irish Times (searching their archive for "Miami Showband" returns a result with an identical first paragraph, published on 31 July 2000; the article is subscriber-only to view). --rbrwrˆ 13:42, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Snow_shoe.jpeg from [133]; "you may not copy or incorporate any of the Content available on the web site into any other work, including your own web site," --Aranel 18:01, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Tsubasa from [134] , but the (possible) vio was uploaded by the (claimed) author of the website: does this indicate she gives permission for it to be used under the GFDL, or just that she doesn't understand the GFDL? Pyrop 23:56, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)

August 15

  • Weeee! (Gonads and Strife) contains the entire lyrics of the "song" [139]. The description of the animation could be kept after the potentially infringing material is removed... --Rlandmann 21:46, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

August 16

  • Image:MapOLDHAM.gif from somewhere on [145]. Site claims full copyright with no reproduction, and the image has their copyright notice on it. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:54, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Linkedin from [146] - it's just an advert, but unfortunately those aren't CSDs. The user who posted it has been adding 2004 EB material to articles, too. -- Hadal 05:44, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
DANFS, like all US Government publications, is public domain text. Article still needs lots of cleanup, but is not a copyvio. -- Ferkelparade π 21:06, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Not a copyvio, and I've included the {{DANFS}} tag in the Temp article --Rlandmann 21:57, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
You also don't need to worry about material from that website as a whole. I help to run HyperWar, and its whole mission is to transcribe out of copyright official histories and archival materials. The only things that are copyrighted on that site are a few things from the British archives that I put online. The copyright is noted with those materials, and anyway, they are covered by the Crown copyright waiver on unpublished public records. The DANFS point also stands on its own as well. David Newton 15:21, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

August 17

  • National Institute of Engineering ,Mysore from [168]. RickK 06:33, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products from [169]. RickK 06:44, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • List of billionaires from [170] - contrary to an often-heard opinion, lists and compilations can be copyrighted, especially if it's a list like that that has to be compiled from so many sources (no milliardaire will publish his net worth). I fear that Forbes may sue the Wikipedia if it reprints this list without permission; what's worse, by placing it under GNU license, Wikipedia also offers a license to resell the list. I think in the worst case, this can lead to a lawsuit that ends in the complete liquidation of the Wikipedia. --Dingo 07:38, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. See Feist v. Rural. Guanaco 15:42, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Agree with Guan after reading Feist v. Rural. This article just contains some of the info that Forbes compiled, and that raw info isn't copyrightable, even if they spent a lot of time compiling it. Copying any expressive choices that Forbes made in their manner of presenting the info would be infringement, but this article doesn't... in fact, it doesn't even take most of the data, such as age, residence, etc, so it can't be said to copy any of Forbes' expressive decisions about which data to display and in what order. - Eisnel 08:03, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      • I'm not sure about this. Firstly, a telephone directory is raw, published data. The compilation I see is that Forbes compiled data into one net worth figure; so the compilation is not the list, but the claim that Citizen Kane has a net worth of 4.567 billion. Eg, as Forbes compiled Ingvar Kamprads net worth to about 50+ billion, IKEA repudiated that in that Kamprad does not earn the firm fully, and so IKEAs net worth is not to be added to Kamprad. Secondly, is only US-law to be considered, or also laws of other english-speaking countries like GB, AU or NZ? To sum it up, you may be right - but is the Wikipedia willing to risk you're not? --Dingo 11:51, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
        • Non-US law is irrelevant if the source of the information was on a web server in the United States. The Wikipedia servers are in the United States and thus subject to American law. Since Forbes.com is also in the United States, it is also governed by American law. David Newton 15:38, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
        • If Forbes, after much research, says that Kane is worth 4.567 billion, it's not copyvio for other news organizations to report that "Forbes says Citizen Kane makes 4.567 bil". It doesn't matter whether that number is a fact or not, Forbes could lie and it still wouldn't be illegal to report Forbes' figure. If Forbes discovered a new planet, would it be copyright infringement for other news sources to report about this planet, since it was Forbes' hard work that led to its discovery? If Forbes compiles a list of the moons that are around this planet, do they now own that list, and can they sue anybody that lists the new planet's moons? This really isn't what copyright is about, from what I understand. You're right that anytime we non-lawyers try to interpret copyright law we walk on shaky ground. You're also right that other countries might interpret this differently. But that applies to most of the images and a good number of the articles on Wikipedia. Think of all the images we use under fair use: that's US fair use law, they all might be illegal in NZ or elsewhere. We just have to do our best to interpret the most relevant and prevalent copyright laws in good faith, and strive onward. So there's my two cents. I don't want to sound harsh, I am happy that you're out there scrutinizing possible copyvio articles and trying to protect Wikipedia against unscrupulous lawyers. And your post here led to some very interesting info that I never knew before. I'm interested to hear how others interpret this situation. - Eisnel 15:54, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Kingkigeli.jpg from [171]. Lupo 09:53, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Pomare IV.bmp, Image:Bez názvu.bmp, Image:Pomare II.bmp, and Image:Pomare V.bmp from [172]. Lupo 10:34, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Image:Robert henry Clarence,last ruler of teh Mosquito.bmp and Image:Mosquito-GAF.jpg from [173]. Lupo 10:34, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • George Augustus Frederic II was originally from [174], too, and still is perilously close to the text there. Lupo 10:34, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Other articles created by user Pomare V. have been rewritten in the meantime. The original versions also were copyright violations from [175]. Lupo 10:34, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Mott Haven, Bronx, New York from [176]. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 15:37, 2004 Aug 17 (UTC)
  • Carl Panzram from [177] -- Wile E. Heresiarch 16:27, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • How to keeps brown recluse spiders away? from [178] andy 17:11, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Points of Concurrency from [179] (pdf). --Diberri | Talk 19:55, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Wang Dulu from http://michelleyeoh.info/Movie/Ch/novels.html --Superninja 22:45, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Dokeos from [180] -- Cyrius|✎ 23:33, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. from corporate site at [182]] - Lucky 6.9 02:58, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Petai from [183] -Frazzydee 03:27, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

August 18

Same anon # removed copyright notice and added more text to article on same day. -- Infrogmation 05:03, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Moved from Aug 1 to here. Re-instantiated the copyvio notice, this time with the correct extlinks. It's from [187] and [188]. Lupo 10:06, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

August 19

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Copyright_problems&oldid=5309990"