Cycle Fan
Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions 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 (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump. |
|
Hi Cycle Fan,
after the many changes in the description of this image, you say it's a "Freely available publicity shot", but at the same time claim that you are the author. Well, "Press shots" and "publicity shots" may be freely available, but are usually not freely licensed. In addition to that, the EXIF data reveal "Steve Behr" as photographer and show that a professional camera model was used. Don't you think it's time for a little bit more clarity (or should I say honesty)? If you really are Steve Behr, then please send us a written permission, using the template on Commons:Email templates and following the instructions over there. Thanks.--Túrelio (talk) 15:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Cycle Fan, thanks for feedback. Let's keep the discussion at one place. First, one important thing: being "available" on a website for everybody to see or to download, doesn't mean it's under a free license or even public domain. On many websites there are images for everybody to see/download, but they are still copyrighted. About "Press shots" I explained already above. In this case you really need to find out, from whom/where you did get this image. If your source is really the rights owner (this should be Steve Behr as his name is still in the EXIF), then you should ask him for a written permission, by sending him an email with the template as explained above. Before that, you should "negotiate" under what license the image can be put; rather surely not PD as this means the loss of all rights. I would recommend a Creative-Commons-BY or -BY-SA license, that guarantees a attribution to the photographer with evry use of the image. To be accetable on Commons, the license must allow commercial use. Hope that helps.--Túrelio (talk) 19:18, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
File source is not properly indicated: File:ED_CLANCY_01.JPG edit
This media was probably deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:ED_CLANCY_01.JPG, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file (
[[:File:ED_CLANCY_01.JPG]] ).
If you created the content yourself, enter If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |