Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rick-Perry.Mug-Shot.ms.081914.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
No reason to think that Texas releases their mug shots under a free license Prosfilaes (talk) 04:49, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
- This is what I got from Travis County: The mugshot was released to the public courtesy of Travis County Sheriff. Not sure what that means, though. Cwobeel (talk) 15:35, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Delete Absent a clear commons compatible release this should not be retained. LGA talkedits 23:29, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
- Can you clarify what is needed? I could contact Travis County again but I need to know what to ask for so that the image can be retained. Thanks. Cwobeel (talk) 02:51, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- If you read COM:OTRS and then ask someone from Travis County who has authority to make such a release to email it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org LGA talkedits 03:03, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- I will try, but I doubt they would do that. What if I get an email reply from them and send to OTRS with headers? Would that work? Cwobeel (talk) 14:39, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- As you can see, the mugshot (and another one from the same county) is already been used for T-shirts, so this means that the shot is in the public domain. See [1]
- What's the connection between the argument and conclusion there? How do we get from a statement of fact to a statement of law?--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know if the question is for me, but if it is, I am not sure I understand your question. Care to clarify? Cwobeel (talk) 19:33, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- I can't speak for Prosfilaes, but I believe he didn't see how this photo appearing on a T-shirt (his "a statement of fact") leads to the conclusion that this photo is in the public domain (his "a statement of law"). In order for this photo to be in the public domain an official of Travis County with suitable authority would have to make the appropriate release. We don't have any evidence that has occurred. With regards to the T-shirt, for all we know the T-shirt proprietor could be reproducing the photo with (a) a valid non-free license from Travis County, or (b) under a belief that their use qualifies for a fair use defense, or even (c) without a license but with the belief that Travis County is unlikely to sue. Commons needs a statement from an official of Travis County with suitable authority that either (a) this photo is in the public domain or (b) this photo is protected by copyright but nonetheless available under a commons compatible license. —RP88 (talk) 19:52, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- I understand now, thank you. I wrote to Travis County, and will send their reply to OTRS when received. Cwobeel (talk) 23:58, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- This is probably in the public domain by virtue of the fact that it was created by a government agency, but I agree that we need hard evidence. Hopefully the OTRS route will prove fruitful.- MrX 20:18, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
- In the United States, photographs created by government agencies are usually copyrighted, unless it is a federal agency. The main exceptions are {{PD-CAGov}} and {{PD-FLGov}}, but this is a different state. --Stefan4 (talk) 20:30, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
- This is probably in the public domain by virtue of the fact that it was created by a government agency, but I agree that we need hard evidence. Hopefully the OTRS route will prove fruitful.- MrX 20:18, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
- I understand now, thank you. I wrote to Travis County, and will send their reply to OTRS when received. Cwobeel (talk) 23:58, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- I can't speak for Prosfilaes, but I believe he didn't see how this photo appearing on a T-shirt (his "a statement of fact") leads to the conclusion that this photo is in the public domain (his "a statement of law"). In order for this photo to be in the public domain an official of Travis County with suitable authority would have to make the appropriate release. We don't have any evidence that has occurred. With regards to the T-shirt, for all we know the T-shirt proprietor could be reproducing the photo with (a) a valid non-free license from Travis County, or (b) under a belief that their use qualifies for a fair use defense, or even (c) without a license but with the belief that Travis County is unlikely to sue. Commons needs a statement from an official of Travis County with suitable authority that either (a) this photo is in the public domain or (b) this photo is protected by copyright but nonetheless available under a commons compatible license. —RP88 (talk) 19:52, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know if the question is for me, but if it is, I am not sure I understand your question. Care to clarify? Cwobeel (talk) 19:33, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- What's the connection between the argument and conclusion there? How do we get from a statement of fact to a statement of law?--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- If you read COM:OTRS and then ask someone from Travis County who has authority to make such a release to email it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org LGA talkedits 03:03, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- Can you clarify what is needed? I could contact Travis County again but I need to know what to ask for so that the image can be retained. Thanks. Cwobeel (talk) 02:51, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I wrote to Travis county Sheriff office, and received this message. My question was: Please indicate if the mughsot photo of James Richard Perry (Gov. Rick Perry), has been released to the public. I am asking this because we would like to use the mugshot image to illustrate an article in Wikipedia about the recent indictment, and Wikipedia requires that such images are released under a free license for inclusion in their articles.
Yes the picture was released to the public.
Roger Wade Senior Public Information Officer Travis County Sheriff's Office Office 512-854-4986 Pager 512-935-1162
Cwobeel (talk) 02:11, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- I have asked Mr Wade to send a message to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with the release. Cwobeel (talk) 02:36, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- I wish you had followed the directions at COM:OTRS as instructed rather that asking them to "indicate if [the photo] has been released to the public". The latest statement from Travis County is not a statement that the photo is in the public domain nor is it a declaration that the photo is available with a Commons-compatible license, it is a statement that the photo has been distributed to the public. It is completely unhelpful, as it very common for copyrighted works to distributed to the public. A classic example of this are press releases. While press releases are intended to be reproduced widely, there is no inherent permission to alter them, create derivative works based on them, or use them for commercial purposes. Accordingly, Commons has to handle press releases like any other copyrighted content. In the absence of an explicit disclaimer or permission, content from press releases can not be uploaded to Commons. Unless you can get an official of Travis County with suitable authority to unambiguously declare that this photo is in the public domain or that they've consented to the photo being published under the terms of a free license like {{Cc-by-4.0}} I think we are going to have to Delete. —RP88 (talk) 03:14, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict × 2) I agree with RP88, the statement "released to the public" is of zero help and it just creates further confusion, please direct the Travis county Sheriff office to COM:OTRS. LGA talkedits 03:22, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- I have done that. Mr. Wade will write directly to OTRS. Cwobeel (talk) 03:34, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict × 2) I agree with RP88, the statement "released to the public" is of zero help and it just creates further confusion, please direct the Travis county Sheriff office to COM:OTRS. LGA talkedits 03:22, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- I wish you had followed the directions at COM:OTRS as instructed rather that asking them to "indicate if [the photo] has been released to the public". The latest statement from Travis County is not a statement that the photo is in the public domain nor is it a declaration that the photo is available with a Commons-compatible license, it is a statement that the photo has been distributed to the public. It is completely unhelpful, as it very common for copyrighted works to distributed to the public. A classic example of this are press releases. While press releases are intended to be reproduced widely, there is no inherent permission to alter them, create derivative works based on them, or use them for commercial purposes. Accordingly, Commons has to handle press releases like any other copyrighted content. In the absence of an explicit disclaimer or permission, content from press releases can not be uploaded to Commons. Unless you can get an official of Travis County with suitable authority to unambiguously declare that this photo is in the public domain or that they've consented to the photo being published under the terms of a free license like {{Cc-by-4.0}} I think we are going to have to
- Delete "Released to the public" is not the same thing as "released to the public domain". For example, all published books and newspapers have been "released to the public" (it is or has been possible to obtain a copy of them in a shop), but quite a lot of them have not been "released to the public domain". --Stefan4 (talk) 13:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion and the OTRS-team will undelete the file after the permission has been validated Natuur12 (talk) 18:02, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
