Commons:Deletion requests/File:Lindowman.jpg
I am shocked to see that this photo looks to be an exact duplicate of British Museum's version at http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/pe_prb/l/lindow_man.aspx. Ordinarily, I would have immediately tagged this with {{copyvio}}, but the uploader has submitted some photos that are evidently his own, so I am bringing it here for further discussion. Jappalang (talk) 22:10, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- Facts
- File:Lindowman.jpg was uploaded to Wikipedia on 18 Feb 2008; Jack1956 claims it was taken on that date.
- There is no EXIF attached, the photo is of 531×569 in size and 8-bit colour depth; it does not have any borders.
- http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/pe_prb/l/lindow_man.aspx has been up at least as early as 2 November 2007; it is likely even earlier, being the cover for British Archaeology May/June 2005.
- The British museum photo is 600x600 in size, including the black border; note that even without the border, this photo is larger than Lindowman.jpg and shows more of the subject's surroundings.
- Observations
- Lindowman.jpg has the same orientation, positioning and lighting as the British Museum photo.
- With the Blending Mode set to Difference, overlaying Lindowman.jpg on the British Museum photo in a graphical editor shows a perfect fit.
Based on the above, I believe that Lindowman.jpg is a downsampled copy of the British Museum photo. Jappalang (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- ...and according to my read of the licensing, is property of Jack1956. Jack is a member of the British Museum Society as quoted on his English Wiki userpage and according to the explicit licensing terms at the official Museum site, it identifies those members as owners. Quoting from the licensing page:
:"'We' 'our' 'us' means The Trustees of the British Museum or as the context requires the British Museum Company Limited, the British Museum Friends or the British Museum Great Court Limited;"
- "This Website contains intellectual property copyright Materials belonging to the Trustees of the British Museum, the British Museum Company Limited, the British Museum Friends, the British Museum Great Court Limited and to third party Authors (from whom the Trustees have made all reasonable efforts to obtain full consent to publish their works and materials on the British Museum website)."
- "2.1 You are permitted to use Materials for Approved Purposes only."
- "“Approved Purposes” means private or non-commercial uses for education, academic study, scholarship or research by individuals or charities, societies, institutions or trusts existing exclusively for public benefit (but no other purposes);"
- I can't speak for Jack but given his stellar work and reputation, I don't believe that he would intentionally violate any copyrights. I'd be willing to bet it is from his read of those terms.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 00:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)- The curious bit, as stated above, is that Jack said Lindowman.jpg is taken on 18 Feb 2008; British Museum's photo is available since 2005. The earlier existence of British Museum's photo would invalidate Lindoman.jpg's claim of 2008 creation.
- I understand how strange this seems, especially since Jack1956 has uploaded File:Bm-ginger.jpg, which is different from BM's photo (orientation- and lighting-wise), has an EXIF, and is much larger than the BM's copy. But in this case, Lindowman.jpg shows too close a match to the BM photo. Jappalang (talk) 04:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi all, Sorry to have caused this debate. My image of Lindow Man is my photograph of the British Museum's own much larger photograph of Lindow Man, on display at a private viewing for Members in 2008. Because he is in a glass case under boxed lighting it is impossible to get a good clear image. I was told by a curator at the time that as a member of the British Museum Society it was OK for me to upload it to Wiki as it was for non-commercial educational purposes. My photograph of the mummy 'Ginger' is entirely my own work, as are all the other photographs taken by me at the BM. Jack1956 (talk) 09:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- Not to worry; deletion requests are here to clarify the copyrights of the photos. Your good work with 'Ginger' and some other subjects is what stopped me from proceeding with a {{copyvio}} tag then. I would advise not taking any more photos of photos; more photos in the vein of 'Ginger' would be appreciated. However, now that Lindowman.jpg is clarified to be licensed for non-commercial purposes, I have tagged it for speedy deletion. It is not in line with what either Wikipedia or Commons deem as "free". Jappalang (talk) 21:27, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- The image's licence on the British Museum's website here [1] would suggest that it can be used on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.77.26 (talk • contribs) 10:24, 11. Jul. 2010 (UTC)
- May be, but it cannot stay on Commons at it is clearly (a derivative of) an image free only for non-commercial uses. --Túrelio (talk) 12:29, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
- I have explained at User talk:Jack1956#Wikipedia's policy on what is a "free" image on why an image restricted to non-commercial purposes is considered "non-free" on Wikipedia. Jappalang (talk) 21:27, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
This image will be deleted from Commons soon. Users active on Wikipedias that allow fair-use or use of no-commercial-use images should copy the image and its description to their project today. --Túrelio (talk) 12:32, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment It's been proven that this image is copyrighted and of course needs to be deleted, but as it's used on several articles across different language Wikipedias, could the deletion be postponed by an hour until I've had the opportunity to go through and replace the photo in each article? I'll leave a note here once I'm done. Cheers, Nev1 (talk) 22:18, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, ready for this image to be deleted. At the moment, it appears that there's heavy usage on en.wiki, but this is just a hangover from use of the image in a template and it might take a while for commons to catch up. Nev1 (talk) 22:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted as it is a derivative of no-commercial use restricted copyrighted original. --Túrelio (talk) 06:12, 12 July 2010 (UTC)