Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Isaac daniel~commonswiki
Files uploaded by Isaac daniel~commonswiki
[edit]The following files has been initially tagged by Isaac daniel as Copyvio (copyvio) and provided links to Flickr, where the source files are currently licensed as All rights reserved:
- File:Casario_Santa_Luzia_MG.jpg (uploaded to Flickr at 22 May 2011 03:49:58 UTC; uploaded to Commons at 7 February 2012 - after)
- File:Hosp_SaoJoaodeDeus_SantaLuziaMG.jpg (uploaded to Flickr at 13 May 2012 03:49:58 UTC; uploaded to Commons at 14 March 2012 - before)
- File:Novo_Forum_de_Santa_Luzia_MG.jpg (uploaded to Flickr at 13 May 2012 03:49:58 UTC; uploaded to Commons at 21 July 2012 - after) (part of the collage)
- File:Rua_Direita_e_Matriz_de_Santa_Luzia_MG.jpg (uploaded to Flickr at 13 May 2012 03:49:58 UTC; uploaded to Commons at 21 July 2012 - after) (part of the collage)
- File:Montagem_cidade_Santa_Luzia_MG.jpg (collage uploaded to Commons at 21 July 2012; see bellow)
Also, the following files aren't tagged for speedy, but part of the above collage:
- File:Monumento_aos_Bravos.jpg (not found at Flickr's user uploads, nor Google Image Search, nor in SkyscraperCity)
- File:AvBrasilia_Santa_LuziaMG.jpg (uploaded to Flickr at 13 May 2012 03:49:58 UTC; uploaded to Commons at 14 March 2012 - before) (photo don't have the Date in the Exif, so, the Date of Taking is actually the Date of upload)
- File:Rua_Floriano_Peixoto_em_Santa_Luzia_MG.jpg (uploaded to Flickr at 22 April 2011 03:49:58 UTC; uploaded to Commons at 21 July 2012 - after)
But, according to the Exif, Isaac Daniel is the photographer (then the copyright holder), therefore, is User:Isaac daniel (the nominator) and User:Isaac daniel~commonswiki (the uploader, known as User:Isaac daniel before the username renaming process) the same person? To avoid copyfraud, please indicate if the uploader (the person behind User:Isaac daniel~commonswiki) is the actual copyright holder, and if the holder actually agree to release these photos under the CC-BY license (in both Flickr and Commons, as demonstrated in the files uploaded first to Commons). Unfortunately, no License Reviewer reviewed the files, but the files first uploaded to Commons shouldn't be questionated and speedy kept.
Also, consider the contributions from the both Isaac Daniel (the only contributions from the newer one was tagging these files for Speedy). Amitie 10g (talk) 02:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Info: Doing an in-deep research, I checked the Date of upload to Commons and compared with the Date of upload to Flickr (using the UNIX Timestamp found using the Flickr API). Also, the only relevant result found in Google Image Search is this post at SkyscraperCity, posted at 13 May 2012 06:25 UTC (more than 2 hours after uploading to Flickr), and Isaac Daniel indicated that these files comes from (and therefore first uploaded to) Flickr. Then, before apply COM:PCP, we should consider that, as CC license are irrevocable, but no License Reviewer reviewed the files, the only way is AGF and consider the source Own work as valid; or, know if the uploader is actually the copyright holder. --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:44, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Comment I'd suggest a Check User with pt:Usuário:Isaac daniel and User:Isaac daniel~commonswiki.--Sanandros (talk) 19:28, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Comment The two profiles are mine, I do not know because it was created another. When I uploaded the pictures I thought it was putting another type of license. I asked to remove the images because I am suffering license violations.--Isaac daniel (talk) 13:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- You can merge your accounts. I think here you can get more information. If not then contact user:derHexer who has sysop rights and can also merge accounts. We introduced on Commons and on WP global user accounts so your original commons account was shifted to User:Isaac daniel~commonswiki and then they created a new account connectet to your WP account which is now your User:Isaac daniel account on commons.
And now the files: Who is accusing you of license violation and what copyright they are claiming?--Sanandros (talk) 18:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- No one is accusing me of violating licenses. Several sites are commercially using my pictures, and it is very difficult judicial proceedings in my locality. A simple license does not protect my intellectual property.--Isaac daniel (talk) 18:40, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- Wrong, a CC license protects you and your rights as long as it protects. And you, as the copyright holder, you still can send a DMCA Takedown to people and websites that used your work without complying with the license. Also, CC licenses are irrevocable, so, the change of licensing are applicable only for ussages after the license change at Flickr (excluding the files first uploaded to Commons, that cannot be questionated). Finally, when uploading files to Commons, you agree and understand the CC-BY-SA license that you choosen (and I suppose that you used the same license at Flickr) and how the Free Licenses protect your rights in the different ways that them provides. Please go to the copyright violators, not to Commons. --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:51, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Isaac daniel: I can merge both your accounts when they both confirm merging them, e.g. you can add both signatures here. But for doing that, I need to move your current 8 commonswiki edits made by Isaac daniel to placeholder name (like Isaac daniel (usurp)). Best, —DerHexer (Talk) 20:13, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
- Wrong, a CC license protects you and your rights as long as it protects. And you, as the copyright holder, you still can send a DMCA Takedown to people and websites that used your work without complying with the license. Also, CC licenses are irrevocable, so, the change of licensing are applicable only for ussages after the license change at Flickr (excluding the files first uploaded to Commons, that cannot be questionated). Finally, when uploading files to Commons, you agree and understand the CC-BY-SA license that you choosen (and I suppose that you used the same license at Flickr) and how the Free Licenses protect your rights in the different ways that them provides. Please go to the copyright violators, not to Commons. --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:51, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Kept: files were apparently uploaded by copyright holder, license is irrevocable. --Jcb (talk) 11:48, 13 August 2016 (UTC)