Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with insource:31341155@N07

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
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.

Files found with Special:Search/insource:31341155@N07

[edit]

The file descriptions on Flickr and the user's profile contain statements clearly showing that the uploader has not intended to release these files under a free license (e.g. "ALL IMAGES are COPYRIGHTED by Ramnath Bhat and ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED Please don't use this image on websites, blogs or other media without my explicit permission.") We cannot in good faith rely on a license that is simultaneously accompanied by statements made by the uploader which directly contradict the supposed licensing terms.

Previous deletion discussions: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Begum Parveen Sultana.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Vinayaraj.

—LX (talk, contribs) 23:58, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is Ramnath Bhat the same person as RBB of Gettyimages? In any case, we can’t be sure that https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/scaly-breasted-munia-royalty-free-image/453144481 , for example, is legally free. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:07, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Incnis Mrsi: If you click "Read more" on their Flickr profile, there is a link to https://www.gettyimages.in/search/photographer-search?photographer=rbb. That's a broken link, but both that and the link you provided have photographer=rbb as the relevant parameter. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:33, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@LX: Do you have proof that this is a case of "a license that [was] simultaneously accompanied by statements made by the uploader"? The applicable issue here is that an author first uploads their photos with creative commons or public domain license. Later the same author changes their mind and adds secondary tags/statements. As I understand it, according to the CC rules, and our own wikimedia guidelines, an image that was once released into CC/public domain cannot become copyrighted later. The rules assume that if the author had an option to choose between multiple licenses, from fully copyrighted to CC of different types to the public domain release, and that author makes the choice, then the rights of that author work one way. That is, that author has the right to release their previously copyrighted image as CC or public domain, but not the other way around. You can't copyright back what you willingly released with CC or into public domain. If our guidelines have recently changed on this, please share the relevant community discussion and consensus with the relevant links. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:51, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sarah! Yes, it's pretty clear that these statements have been there all along and that this isn't a case of {{flickr-change-of-license}}. Most of the file descriptions here on Commons include those statements in the file descriptions, showing that they were there when the files were transferred (e.g. File:Safa Masjid Ponda GOA (9489257982).jpg), and archived versions of the Flickr descriptions show that those statements were already in place close to the time of creation and years before they were copied here (e.g. File:Interior of Shaniwar Wada, Pune (8540392146).jpg which is archived here). The Flickr profile page has also had those statements since the first archived version. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:42, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 09:00, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_found_with_insource:31341155@N07&oldid=344938607"