Wikipedia talk:Image use policy/copyright: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 705:
''"Accurate photographs of paintings lack expressive content and are automatically in the public ___domain once the painting's copyright has expired (95 years after initial publication). All other copyright notices can safely be ignored."'' [[Public_domain_image_resources]]<br>
Am I correct in reading that as meaning that any jpg, gif, etc. of a painting first produced in 1908 or earlier found on the web can be safely appropriated for use here? Or do we need to be more subtle about it? Guidelines? (This is specifically in connection with the discussion at [[m:Talk:Egyptopedia]]. ''–[[User:
: If the scanning guy in addition done some graphic manipulation on it, then the image's copyright magically becomes his. Does such graphic manipulation include resize and highlight?! I dunno. --[[User:Menchi|Menchi]] 01:52, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
OK, thanks for taking the time to answer. Definite grey area, then; I'll hold back. ''–[[User:
: There is one thing that you could do, if you want: if the image does not have digital watermark (I'm not sure how to check it), you could crop/resize/enhance it yourself so that it is not identical to the original image, and it could not be proven whether you or someone else scanned it. If you then post it to Wikipedia claiming that you have the copyright, it is not illegal for Wikipedia to use the image, only for you. [[User:Nikola Smolenski|Nikola]] 18:06, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hmmm... interesting. But it's still not entirely kosher, is it? Let's try a different tack: what's the legal position of scanning in 19th C. art from late-20th C. books (books which have the "No part of this publication may in any way be reproduced... etc., etc." blurb in the front)? Still a grey area? ''–[[User:
==Civil War Pictures==
| |||