Wikipedia talk:Public domain

src: bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com

Video Wikipedia talk:Public domain

Two areas not particularly well covered here

(i) works by the United Nations, and its subsidiaries. (ii) digital scans of old works.

These two come together in for instance The World Digital Library, which has some connection with UNESCO (and Library of Congress).

I'm looking at a work originally written in 1521, but this is a French translation of it, from about 1525. Document itself is held at Yale University Library. My question is, what copyright restrictions are there, if any, on uploading any page, such as this page or this one to wikipedia/wikimedia?

Unbuttered parsnip (talk) mytime= Sat 21:40, wikitime= 13:40, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

The "sweat of the brow" rule applies. A photograph of a public-domain work that implies little effort to create a copy aside from getting access is hardly copyrightable. The simple snapshot isn't much of an effort, and neither is minor cropping or enhancing. What is copyrightable is a collection of photographs that implies some sophisticated selection and extensive commentary (which would make the collection a hybrid of photography and a literary effort.

Professional photography, even by a mass-market photographer, is copyrighted even if the photographer is simply an employee of the photographer with little formal training in photography. Thus wedding or baby/child pictures taken by such a photographer are copyrighted. Persons photographed effectively assign the negatives to the corporation that photographs people and pay a fee to get reproductions. The photo company has expensive equipment that people taking snapshots would not ordinarily use and has costs of transportation of a photographer, however slightly-skilled, cost the 'creator' something. A basic rule: if money is involved in creating the work and someone makes a living by doing the work, it is professional.

Turning the pages of a book (even if one gets access, which may be difficult) and clicking a shutter is not much work, so it fails the "sweat of the brow" test. It's not in the same league of complexity as writing, translating, or composing. That said, adding captions to pictures and adding such editorial content as a foreword, table of contents, and index -- and of course setting the pages for publication -- creates a copyrightable BOOK -- a literary work even if the contents are mostly pictures.Pbrower2a (talk) 03:17, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Maps Wikipedia talk:Public domain

17 USC, chapters 9 and 13

The article says: "The U.S. Copyright Law is Title 17 of the United States Code (17 USC), chapters 1 through 8 and 10 through 12. Chapters 9 and 13 contain design protection laws on semiconductor chips and ship hulls that are of no interest or relevance for Wikipedia."

This is not correct. We have a wide variety of images of semiconductor chips in the various WMF projects, most notably Commons:Category:Integrated circuits. If the chips are copyrighted, then the images infringe and cannot be kept on Commons. Similarly, we have a wide variety of images of ship hulls.

Therefore, I see no reason why these two chapters of 17 USC should be treated any differently from the rest. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me o contribs) 15:33, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Those chapters don't cover images of chips and boat hulls. Chapter 9 covers mask works, a particular form of work used in the manufacture of chips under certain technologies. Chapter 13 provides a design patent-like right to prevent the making and selling of ships with protected hulls.

Neither Chapter 9 or 13 are copyright law. They happen to sit in the same volume of the US Code where the copyright law sits as a matter of convenience. TJRC (talk) 00:05, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Passport photos

Are US passport photos public domain? Are foreign passport photos?

US passports themselves are PD because they are generated by an employee of the State Department. But is the photo within the passport copyright-free? In most cases, the applicant takes two photos of themselves (or has a photographer do it) and submits them along with their application. Does the application contain any language that the applicant is surrendering the copyright of those photograph?

This came up on the photograph of Tashfeen Malik, the female San Bernardino shooter. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tashfeen Malik.jpg. Another way of looking at it, can a celebrity who is jealous of their image copyright-protect the photo within their passport? See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Janisjoplin.png. Maybe it's moot because a passport photo doesn't rise to a sufficient level of creativity? We need an answer to this for the possible removal of File:Tashfeen Malik.jpg. --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 21:48, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

U.S. passport photographs are probably covered under "Template:PD-USGov-State". - Illegitimate Barrister (talk o contribs), 07:50, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Most definitely not. They are not the work of a government official in any way. I think you've got a hard row to hoe if you want to argue they're anything but copyrighted like most any other picture.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:46, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

src: www.cruisebe.com

Questions

• If copyrighted materials are used for nonprofit educational purposes such as content generation in Wikipedia does it violate copyvio.
• If the material used are only factual descriptions does it violate copyvio.
• Usage of material consisting information that is commonly available and contains no originality. e.g. History. Does it violate copyvio.
• Is it a good practice to use materials that hasn't registered for any copyrights or does it violate copyvio.
• If material used is available through multiple sites for public use, is it copyvio violation.
• Using content straight from textbooks or articles with changes, is it a copyvio violation.
• Does sound-clip usage of a publicly performed song which doesn't require the copyright permission of the literary work used, come under copyvio violation.
• If a media clip used is his or her own production and the work is not registered and is uploaded to wikipedia will it be a copyvio violation.

61.1.216.137 (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

All of these are copyright violations except the last. If you upload something you created entirely yourself, that's fine. Otherwise, see:

• WP:Copying text from other sources
• WP:Copyrights#Contributors' rights and obligations
• WP:Media copyright questions is a place to ask specific questions.

JohnCD (talk) 10:05, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

@JohnCD: How to avoid these issues in submission and while seeking sources for content expansion. Say if i want to add content to an article and the source would be an article or textbook. The image will also be from the article. Is there wikipedia tool where one can create charts and diagrams that will reflect the same details as in the source image.59.88.211.226 (talk) 10:21, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

It's difficult. For text, the basic advice is, write in your own words, summarising what is said in the source, and being careful to avoid WP:Close paraphrasing. You can use short WP:quotations, enclosed in quotes and properly attributed. For images, there are (very restricted) circumstances where a non-free image can be used, but it must satisfy all ten of the conditions at WP:NFCC. Company logos and book or album covers can be used in this way. It's hard to be more general - I suggest asking at WP:Media copyright questions about a specific example that you have in mind. JohnCD (talk) 11:59, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you .

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Status of non-US, UK government publications?

I note that the page here only refers to documents issued by the US and UK governments. Does anyone know whether other national governments tend to copyright their own publications, and/or which governments do and do not copyright their publications? I think a lot of foreign government publications are really useful for material on some ethnic groups in their countries, for instance, and it might be very useful to know how we can use such material. John Carter (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Varies from country to country. Many governments put some documents in the public domain, although some governments make all of their documents unfree. If you are wondering about some specific country, try c:Special:PrefixIndex/Template:PD-country name, and if that doesn't work, replace the country name with the two-letter country code, then check any templates which contain the words "gov", "government" or "exempt". --Stefan2 (talk) 19:28, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

src: s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com

Crown copyrights

The new editions to the Crown copyrights give zero guidance on what to do. Appears to be just a copy of the law. Was there a talk about this? How does this help editors.104.249.227.116 (talk) 01:32, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Source of article : Wikipedia