Commons talk:Licensing

Commons discussion pages (index)

Commons Help desk Community-wide general discussion Copyright Proposals Graphics and photography discussion Image improvement Photography critiques Categories for discussion Deletion requests OTRS noticeboard Translators' noticeboard Work requests for bots Contact administrators Vandalism User problems (Dispute resolution) Blocks and protections Bureaucrats' noticeboard CheckUser requests #wikimedia-commons webchat Commons mailing list (archive) Commons' bugs on Phabricator

Shortcut CT:L This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Licensing. This is not a forum for general discussion of the page's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). New to Commons? Check out the project scope. Ask questions, get answers. For discussions of specific copyright questions, please go to Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Discussions that do not relate to changes to the page Commons:Licensing may be moved, with participants notified with the template {{subst:moved to VPC|Commons talk:Licensing}}. For old discussions, see the Archives. Recent sections with no replies for 14 days may be archived.

Archived discussions

Seven 2006/2007 discussions organized as subpages, ignoringincl. comments added in 2014:

• ADRM
• Review of license templates
• U.S. patents
• Ecoport copyleft
• Museums Bilder (in German)
• Explaining why Derivative Work and Commercial Use must be allowed
• Which countries' copyright laws determine copyright status?

Template protection after review

There are many country specific copyright templates on commons that need review and should be protected thereafter. Many images on commons use these templates and changing something in the template like accidentally adding a hot cat category would affect all of these and would require mass purging for all images. We should have a review department reviewing each available template and after discussion protecting it. We should discuss the layout of PD templates: Should they include why they are PD in the USA or should this be handled in another template like {{PD-Egypt}} and {{PD-Egypt-1996}}. With the URAA laws the copyright laws of a country doesn't mean that much without an explanation on why they are PD in USA. Something like {{PD-China}} doesn't work for commons because it doesn't specify why it's PD USA. And should there be templates for country specific templates for each case like found in Category:Egypt-related tags? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diaa abdelmoneim (talk • contribs) 14:06, 2009 April 23 (UTC)

நான் சொந்தமாக எடுத்து இணைக்கும் படங்கள் எந்த வகையில் Copyright violations ஆகிறது?

நான் சொந்தமாக எடுத்து இணைக்கும் படங்களை ஏன் நீங்கள் நீக்குகிறீர்கள். அவை எந்த வகையில் Copyright violations ஆகிறது. புதிதாக யாரும் கட்டுரையோ படங்களையோ இணைக்கூடாது என்று நினைக்கிறீர்களா? எங்களுக்கு வேறு வேலை வெட்டி இல்லை என்றா நினைத்துக்கொண்டு இருக்கிறீர்கள்.... நீங்கள் அனுப்பிய இந்த செய்திக்கு என்ன பொருள். எதற்க்காக last warning. உடன் பதிலை சொல்லுங்கள் திரு. ஆலன்O.

"Hello Velu66. It has come to our attention that you have uploaded several files that are copyright violations. You have done so despite requests from editors not to do so, and despite their instructions. See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter useful.

This is your last warning. Continuing to upload copyright violations will result in your account being blocked. Please leave me a message if you have further questions."

Droit d'importer la couverture d'un document officiel et public?

Bonjour, Dans le cadre du wikiMOOC, je prépare un article sur la charte de la personne hospitalisée parue le du 6 mars 2006. Je voudrais illustrer mon article avec la couverture du texte de la charte (qui est très colorée). Ai-je le droit? Je dois rendre mon article avant dimanche 9 avril minuit. Merci de votre réponse. --Astre06 (talk) 15:41, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Bonjour Astre06,

Qu'entendez-vous par « très colorée » ? Ce document est-il visible en ligne ? En principe, tout document a un droit d'auteur, et il faut donc l'autorisation de l'auteur pour l'importer sur Commons. Si le document est très simple (que du texte factuel, ex : File:Gallimard Bibliothèque des Histoires.jpg), il n'y a pas d'originalité et pas de droit d'auteur. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:09, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Merci Yann pour votre réponse. Voici la page en question, c'est uniquement la couverture que je souhaite importer sur Commons : http://social-sante.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/charte_a4_couleur.pdf. Il s'agit d'un document public, puisqu'il est distribué à toute personne hospitalisée Qu'en pensez-vous?--Astre06 (talk) 20:55, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

A priori, non. La couverture est complexe et possède un droit d'auteur. La seule possibilité serait que le document soit publié sous la « Licence Ouverte / Open Licence », mais je n'ai pas l'impression que ce soit le cas. En tous cas, aucune mention ici. Désolé. Yann (talk) 21:20, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

ok merci pour votre réponse, j'apprends  Thank you et je viens de reposer la même question sur la page Commons Service d'aide, car j'avais oublié que j'avais une liste de suivi! J'apprends encore --Astre06 (talk) 09:03, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Cartoon does not explain why Commons does not accept "noncommercial" licenses.

The cartoon does not explain why Commons does not accept "noncommercial" licenses. It merely argues that you should consider not releasing material under a "noncommercial" license because "by forbidding commercial applications you are forbidding your photographs from being used on inexpensive DVDs and books published by Wikipedia". It doesn't even mention Commons, and it doesn't explain why this is the case. (Possibly because it is not the case?) I suggest that the caption be revised. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:28, 10 May 2017 (UTC)