User talk:Proclius
Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing. |
| |
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?) |
--LegobotOperatortalk 00:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Read the above. When you make changes to a copyrighted work, you've created a derivative—a work that incorporates elements of your own original authorship as well as those of the author of the original work. This isn't necessarily illegal, because it may qualify as fair use. But it isn't permitted on Commons, because all content uploaded here must be completely freely licensed. Derivatives are thereby excluded. Your removal of the derivative deletion notices, which sourced the works from which those images derived, and your replacement of those notices with a generic, uninformative deletion notice, was therefore inappropriate. Postdlf 03:28, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
First, I didn't create the artworks. I was commenting on the suggestion -- which is mistaken -- that the works are a breach of copyright. I think you don't understand the meaning of 'derivative'. the works in question are not 'changes to a copyrighted work'. They are original works inspired by the photographs in question. Your peremptory response is therefore inappropriate.
- He copied the figures from those images—the composition, pose, clothing, and expression. The drawings therefore indisputably make use of copyrighted elements from the original photographs, whether you want to call that "use" adaptation, transformation, etc. That's what makes them derivatives. You're also incorrectly conflating what may be legally permissible with what may be permissibly uploaded to Commons. Not the same thing, as fair use is a defense against copyright infringement, but Commons does not permit uploads based on fair use claims. Postdlf 03:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
This is an absurd argument, attempting to defend the indefensible. You started by saying the works were 'changes to a copyrighted work'. Then 'he copied the works'. Now you're saying they can't be uploaded because they can't be uploaded. Clearly, you are out of your depth here. (Or you have a vested interest). Either way, you should stop interfering in matters beyond your competence, and let others rule fairly on the matter.