Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Madeleine McCann MB.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Derivative work of copyrighted photograph 81.169.183.122 13:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Delete per nom --Simonxag 19:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)- Keep because it is the most used photo of maddy on all pages.--217.209.116.113 15:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Remember, this is not a vote, only arguments count. And if it's a copyright violation, it must go, no matter how widely used is. On the other hand, what's the copyrighted image from where it was taken? -- Drini 15:58, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Also, 217.209.116.113 has been creating MMCann pages across a lot of small wikis without content, only the picture, and he is the responible of the image being widely used (he posts it on almost any wiki).
- However, the nominator doesn't provide proof the image it's a copyright violation, until it's done, I'm refraining to take a position. -- Drini 16:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - If it can be demonstrated that the image breaches copyright then, as said above by Drini, it must go but the alleged source must be produced to substantiate this. I have had a good search through Google images and a possible culprit that I could find is here. However, there is no indication that I could see that shows that the Commons picture was taken from that source rather than vice versa. What bothers me is the discussion at User talk:StaraBlazkova#Image:Madeleine McCann information.JPG which seems to contain a confession that she didn't take the original picture. BlueValour 16:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think you are misunderstanding the discussion. Isn't User:StaraBlazkova asking whether she can truly claim that the photo was self-made, regardless of who took the photo displayed on the poster itself? Thincat 13:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- The main problem, the one that makes this a derivative work, is the girl's photo in the middle. This is copyrighted, because all UK works are, by law and without any action needed on the part of the artist or publisher. It's no good talking about "freedom of panorama" or "de minimis" or whatever: the central photo is what this image is about, this is a derivative image of that photo. Unless the central photo of Madeleine has been released under a free license, then this image is not under a free license and it has to be removed. The girl's family have released the picture for a specific purpose (and hence with an implicit license), but have they really released it for any purpose? Any purpose?. It can be used as "fair use" but not on the Commons. --Simonxag 02:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
deleted, the photo is clearly a derivative work of the photo shown on the poster. The poster is a non-permanent istallation and therefore is not covered by freedom of panorama. --> delete --ALE! ¿…? 09:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
