Richard Nowell

NC licenses

I am sorry to say that I have just finished deleting all of your uploads from the SDSS -- as you carefully said in the descriptions, their image use policy says:

""Any SDSS image on the SDSS Web site may be downloaded, linked to, or otherwise used for non-commercial purposes..."

Unfortunately neither Commons nor WP:EN permit NC licenses. Please see Commons:Licensing. If you have questions, you may ask them at the Village Pump in any of 42 languages or on my talk page. I will also watch for questions here on your talk page for at least a week. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:04, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I thought that using those astronomical images on WP was for non-commercial purposes (I'm not making any money from them). Obviously I was wrong. There are some more SDSS-based images in the article Pea galaxy that do seem to have survived though. Why have they been left while others are deleted, or is it just a matter of time? I ask this because those images have been there for a prolonged period of time, which is why I presumed it would be alright to repeat the process and upload others.

While we're here, can I download an image from the Hubble Space Telescope, edit it, and then upload it to WP to use if the authors of the image i.e. NASA scientists are properly credited? Rgds Richard Nowell (talk) 18:05, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Update; I've removed an image 'File:A Montage of Six Extreme Green Pea Galaxies.jpg' from the article 'Pea galaxy', as these are SDSS pictures edited by me, so are the same as the ones you've already deleted. Please delete this.

There is another image using SDSS images in this article called 'File:Wiki Peas Montage.jpg'. This has been used in public, first of all at an astronomy conference called JENAM in 2010. The credits to me and the SDSS can be seen here: http://www.jenam2010.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=3&Itemid=34

Presumably as it's been in public use, it's alright to be used here. rgds Richard Nowell (talk) 09:14, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Yesterday I deleted only images that you had uploaded to Commons, working from your contributions list. I missed the first of those you mention above because it is not on Commons, it is on WP:EN. You should supply a fair use rationale there, or it should be removed from WP:EN. You had uploaded the second image to WP:EN and it was transferred here by a bot, so it did not show up in your contributions. Your use of it without permission at the conference violated the SDSS license -- since the conference had an admission fee, showing it there was a commercial use -- but it was probably a fair use under USA law (I don't think there is fair use under Portuguese law, but it is hard to imagine the SDSS suing you there for the violation). However, public use has nothing to do with its copyright status. You could post it permanently in public in the USA and the copyright issue would remain. I have, therefore, deleted it.

As for the HST, that is not enough to answer the question. The HST is a camera and who owns the camera is not important to copyright -- the question is, who is the photographer and what license does he grant? If the photographer -- the astronomer operating the camera -- is a NASA employee, no problem, but otherwise it can be under copyright -- see {{PD-USGov-NASA}} and {{PD-Hubble}}. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:55, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I occurs to me that you might be able to convince the SDSS to change its licensing policy. Most people who put an NC license on their images do not understand that it is very restrictive. Under an NC license, you cannot use an image:

• In any educational institution, unless the school has no tuition charge (therefore no colleges or universities)
• In any printed work unless the work is distributed free and carries no advertising (therefore no textbooks)
• At any event that is not free and open to the public (therefore no academic conferences)
• On any web site owned by a business
• On any web site that carries advertising
• On any web site owned by a charity if the charity solicits money on the web site (i.e. WP and Commons)
• On any personal web site if the site explicitly or implicitly advertises the owner's services

Just about the only valid practical use is on a hobby web site that is entirely personal run by a person who makes his living in another field. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

The pic (six extreme peas) that has the WP:EN option of a fair use rationale I've removed from the article and have no intention of supplying a rationale. So it should be deleted from WP:EN, either by you or me. Rgds Richard Nowell (talk) 08:15, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Neither of us can delete it from WP:EN because we are not Admins there -- I have nominated it and it should be deleted in due course. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:27, 2 August 2014 (UTC)