Wikipedia:Media copyright questions

  (Redirected from Wikipedia:MCQ)
Media copyright questions

Welcome to the Media Copyright Questions page, a place for help with image copyrights, tagging, non-free content, and related questions. For all other questions please see Wikipedia:Questions.

How to add a copyright tag to an existing image
  1. On the description page of the image (the one whose name starts File:), click Edit this page.
  2. From the page Wikipedia:File copyright tags, choose the appropriate tag:
    • For work you created yourself, use one of the ones listed under the heading "For image creators".
    • For a work downloaded from the internet, please understand that the vast majority of images from the internet are not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. Exceptions include images from flickr that have an acceptable license, images that are in the public domain because of their age or because they were created by the United States federal government, or images used under a claim of fair use. If you do not know what you are doing, please post a link to the image here and ask BEFORE uploading it.
    • For an image created by someone else who has licensed their image under the GFDL, an acceptable Creative Commons license, or has released their image into the public domain, this permission must be documented. Please see Requesting copyright permission for more information.
  3. Type the name of the tag (e.g.; {{GFDL-self}}), not forgetting {{ before and }} after, in the edit box on the image's description page.
  4. Remove any existing tag complaining that the image has no tag (for example, {{untagged}})
  5. Hit Publish changes.
  6. If you still have questions, go on to "How to ask a question" below.
How to ask a question
  1. To ask a new question hit the "Click here to start a new discussion" link below.
  2. Please sign your question by typing ~~~~ at the end.
  3. Check this page for updates, or request to be notified on your talk page.
  4. Don't include your email address, for your own privacy. We will respond here and cannot respond by email.
Note for those replying to posted questions

If a question clearly does not belong on this page, reply to it using the template {{mcq-wrong}} and, if possible, leave a note on the poster's talk page. For copyright issues relevant to Commons where questions arising cannot be answered locally, questions may be directed to Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright.

Click here to purge this page
(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)

Radio Station ID Check?Edit

Looking for advice/opinion on potential copyright issues with uploading a recording of a top-of-the-hour ID for a radio station. I found some old recordings and thought it would be a good addition to an article, and while I think it would be at least fair use I'd appreciate others' opinions. To be clear, all I'm talking about is audio of stating the station call letters, city of license, and slogan with an SFX bed under it. Thanks Carter (talk) 18:42, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tcr25. The general concept of fair use is similarly to Wikipedia's concept of non-free content in many ways, but it's not the entirely same thing as explained in WP:NFC#Background and WP:ITSFAIRUSE. Since the recordings you're asking about seem to be "non-free content", you're going to have to establish how their use meets Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. Wikipedia does allow short audio files to be uploaded as explained in WP:NFC#Audio clips, but each clip will still need to satisfy all ten non-free content use criteria. There are a couple of these criteria which might be hard to meet when it comes to such clips (at least as you've described them above).
The first possible issue has to do WP:NFCC#1 (WP:FREER) in that even though the clips themselves might be copyrighted, it might be possible to for a free alternative way of providing the same information to be used instead of a non-free file. If the clips are basically a recording of the station's ID/call letters and it's slogan, then most likely the same information could just as easily be understood through simple text (text is an acceptable alternative to non-free content) supported by a citation to a reliable source.
The next possible issue has to do with WP:NFCC#3 (WP:NFC#Multimedia). If there's some kind of background music playing in the background, then that might introduce additional copyright eligible elements that need to be considered. There's also the length of the clips that would need to be considered since anything deemed to be too is not unlikely going to be deemed minimal use.
WP:NFCC#4 might be an issue if you the clips you want to upload are coming from a website which hosts user-generated content per WP:YOUTUBE and WP:ELNEVER because quite bit of content uploaded to such sites is usually done without the consent of the original copyright holder. If the audio is sourced from a radio station's original website or official social media account, then this would probably not be an issue. If , on the other hand, it's just some website or YouTube channel maintained by fans, etc., then it could be.
Finally, the last thing might have to do with WP:NFCC#8 (WP:NFC#CS). Even if there's something really unique about the recording (the DJ's voice, etc.), it might still be a case of WP:NOTEVERYTHING which might not really be necessary for the reader's of the article to know; nice perhaps to hear, but not really necessarily something that would be considered to significantly improve the reader's understanding of the article. Most likely you would need to see whether you can find any sourced critical commentary about the particular audio clip (not the station, but actual discussion about the clip itself) which could be added to the article so that there's a good contextual reason for the reader to hear the clip. Simply adding the clip with a caption just because the reader might find it interesting is likely going to be considered a bit WP:DECORATIVE.
The thing about these 10 non-free content use criteria is that they all are expected to be met for each use; so, if even WP:JUSTONE doesn't, then the use is considered to be non-free compliant.
I've just given you a bit of a general answer and some things to think about. I'm not trying to discourage you, but non-free content use is by it's very nature considered quite exception for the most part and there generally needs to be a very solid policy based justification for using it. If perhaps you can provide more specifics, someone else can perhaps give you a more specific answer. There is a Wikiproject called Wikipedia:WikiProject Radio Stations where you might also get some additional feedback. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:50, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Marchjuly, I figured it would be a marginal case, probably a WP:NOTEVERYTHING situation. Carter (talk) 16:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Golden langur region1909 IGImap.jpg and 2 other related filesEdit

Hello. Can these three files under the Category:Out of copyright in 1991 be transferred to Commons with their changed "licensing"? For some reason (perhaps the indicated licensing on those three files) I cannot transfer them thru FileExporter.

The author of the subject, John George Bartholomew, died in 1920, so according to this section of a WikiCommons page about copyright rules in India, the subject should be in PD since 1980 (60 years after his death, and +1 = 1981, but for some reason it was categorized under 1991). I'm thinking of changing the indicated licensing of these three files to {{PD-India}} and Commons:Template:PD-old-auto-1923 (maybe indicate |deathyear=1920), because I suspect the FileExporter doesn't work (giving warning message). But I might need second opinion to say that I will do the right thing. Thanks for the response. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Pinging (for attention) @P199 and Finnusertop: et. Al. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
@JWilz12345: you are correct about the public domain status (although the country of origin could be also UK instead of India, but that doesn't change anything). See the tags I placed on File:Golden langur region1909 IGImap.jpg that now allow it to be exported (FileExporter doesn't always recognize all of our en Wikipedia tags, because there isn't always an exact match on Commons, even when the files are free). You can swap {{PD-old}} for Commons:Template:PD-old-auto-1923 once the files are on Commons if you like. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:23, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: I transferred all 3 files to Commons thru FileExporter. I begin to think of adding a "3rd PD tag" which is Commons:Template:PD-UK-posthumous-non-photo-1996. Would this be fine or could cause complexity (and unwanted problems) because of the existence of 3 PD tags? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:15, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

@JWilz12345: I don't think it would cause any problems. You can write a note in the Permission field that you are unsure which is the country of origin and hence the two different tags. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 04:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Questions on Filipino Government WorksEdit

Per {{Non-free Philippines government}}, Filipino Government works are unfree as Republic Act 8293 (Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines) forbids the use of government works for commercial purposes. However, another Commons template, c:Template:PD-PhilippinesGov stated that all Filipino Government works are in public domain (and relevant deletion requests are on c:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-PhilippinesGov and c:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-PhilippineGov). Here comes a contradiction on whether Filipino Government works can be accepted as free works.

So, can works like File:The AFP Medal of Valor.jpg tagged under {{Non-free Philippines government}} be moved to Commons as free files? And how to deal with Commons works tagged under c:Template:PD-PhilippinesGov that are used on English Wikipedia (i.e. remove them from articles?)?廣九直通車 (talk) 04:44, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

There's been some disagreement over this for quite some time between Commons and (English) Wikipedia. One discussion I remember is Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 64#Philippine government works, but I there are others that go back as far as 2006. I've seen quite a number of files which were uploaded locally as non-free to Wikipedia, turn up at Commons as PD which leads to the local files deletion per WP:F10. For those files still around that were uploaded locally as non-free content, they're probably OK as such as long as the way they're being used in articles complies with WP:NFCCP; problems, however, can develop when editors start adding them (in good faith for the most part) to pages where non-free use is never allowed (e.g. userpages, templates, portals) or try using them in ways which are tend to be problematic per WP:NFCC#8 (e.g. list articles, as infobox flag icons). Not sure what the solution is since everytime it comes up, there's a bit of discussion which usually ends up archived without anything be really resolved. The same thing happens with lots of things related to the NFCCP.
FWIW, files like File:The AFP Medal of Valor.jpg might be a bit trickier to deal with because of c:COM:CB#Jewelry. There might be two copyrights involved even if medal is PD for reasons similar to those given in c:COM:Replicas of PD artworks. Neither Commons nor Wikipedia is going to accept a files that is not 100% "free"; so, unless the photo itself is considered a slavish copy, permission might be needed for that as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Can I use a picture from a newspaper?Edit

I want to write an article on Emile Benoist, a spree-shooter in Hackettstown, NJ. There's not a whole lot of sources, but I'm going to see what I can dig up as I am local. Anyway, would I be able to use the only picture of him I've been able to find ( which originates from the Allentown, PA Morning Call Newspaper? It appears to be a school photo, but there's no way to know its origin beyond the newspaper, and there's no photo credit in the article. I know I may be hampered by a lack of sources, as that is the only photo I have found, but I just want to know if it can be used in an article. "Yes...It's Raining" 07:55, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Yesitsraining. If Benoist is still living and you didn't take the photo yourself, then you'd need the WP:CONSENT of the person who did in order for it to be used. You can find out some more information about this at c:Commons:OTRS. Without the CONSENT of the copyright holder, the file could only be uploaded as non-free content; however, non-free photos of still living persons are almost never allowed per non-free content use criterion #1. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:21, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for answering. No, he's not alive - he killed himself at the end of his shooting spree. How does that change the guidelines?"Yes...It's Raining" 08:26, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Non-free file’s of deceased persons can sometime be used per item 10 of WP:NFCI as long as the particular use satisfies all ten non-free content use criteria listed at WP:NFCCP. Non-free files, however, can only be used in articles; so, if no Wikipedia article has been created about this person yet, then you shouldn’t try and upload any non-free photos of him until one has. — Marchjuly (talk) 09:15, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
I hope I'm not being annoying and I appreciate your help. I want to be the person to write that article AND upload that image to include it with the article. So, if I were to create an article on this subject, would I be able to include the picture in the article? Thanks for helping!"Yes...It's Raining" 09:32, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Just as there’s no guarantee that any article you create won’t end up deleted for one reason or another, there’s no guarantee that any non-free images you upload to use in such an article won’t end up being deleted. Articles aren’t required to have images, but non-free images are required to be used in at least one article per WP:NFCC#7. So, my suggestion to you would be to first create an article which will survive WP:AFD, and then figure if a non-free image can be used. As long as there’s no reasonable expectation of a free equivalent image being created or found which can serve the same encyclopedic purpose as a non-free one, it should be OK. However, as long as there’s no article to use the image, uploading it will only lead to it being speedily deleted per WP:F5. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:44, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Gotcha. Thanks a million!"Yes...It's Raining" 10:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Leonard Hofstadter.jpgEdit

Hello, tell me please if I can use this image in my commertial Social Media. Of course with credit to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry no. The image is used on Wikipedia under Wikipedia's non-free content criteria. As Wikipedia does not own the copyright on the image nobody here can give you permission for you to use it elsewhere. Nthep (talk) 12:06, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Business Development Bank of Canada Logo.svgEdit

This seems quite simple with the only possible copyrighted element being the red maple leaf. The maple leaf shape in general is probably simple and generic enough to not be eligible for copyright on it's own, but a bit of a 3D effect seems to have been added to it in this logo. Does that 3D aeffect push this over c:COM:TOO United States? Even if it's not PD per c:COM:TOO Canada, the file could still be licensed as {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} if it's considered PD in the US. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:24, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

It seems to me that by comparison to the Best Western example, it is public domain in the United States. In Canada, I think there might be some legitimate question about whether the decision to stylize the maple leaf in that unconventional form was a creative act. (Is it a reference to a typographical asterisk? A simplification for artistic purposes? Does the bifurcation represent a conceptual duality, or is it intended to represent the physical form of a leaf?) I'd say that if it is unlikely that we will learn the designer's intent and whether it was indeed a product of skill and judgment, {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} is the better option. Either way, I think this is a low-risk decision. TheFeds 10:16, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

File:TIGER 21 Logo Wobble.jpgEdit

Any reason why this needs to remain non-free? Country of origin is the US and it appears to be nothing more than a simple shape with perhaps some color gradiation added. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Distribution of Races on the Balkans in 1922 Hammond.pngEdit

Hello. Can this file (File:Distribution of Races on the Balkans in 1922 Hammond.png) be transferred to Commons? Is the PD-tag on that file sufficient for it to be transferred to Commons? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Pinging @Finnusertop: sorry for disturbing again hehe. I can still remeber your response here before, and I thought you have ample insight on media copyrights. Also, it seems that my query is ignored. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:45, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
No problem, JWilz12345. C. S. Hammond & Co. means that the country of origin is the US, and since the map has been published in 1923, its copyrights have expired. I changed the license tag to the slightly less ambiguous {{PD-US-expired}}. That's the only tag the file needs to be moved to Commons. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 10:54, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks @Finnusertop:. Keep safe in the midst of the pandemic :-) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:56, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Portion of mural Tragic Prelude, by John Steuart Curry, Kansas Capitol, Topeka.jpegEdit

I came across this photo via WP:THQ#How to format Infobox Artwork when work requires two images. It’s a photo of part of larger mural called Tragic Prelude. There are two other photos of different parts of the mural uploaded to Commons under PD licenses and one of them is claiming that the work is c:Template: PD-US-no notice. If that’s correct, then the entire mural should also be PD as well, right? If it is, then any non-free photos of it would likely fail WP:NFCC#1. This photo, however, isn’t really a case of c:COM:2D copying since it’s not really a straight on photo of a single wall, but more of a photo that has some depth showing multiple walls; so, I’m not sure whether it might qualify as a WP:Derivative work even if the mural itself is PD. That would mean a separate license would also be needed for the photo and that it can’t be used with the WP:CONSENT of the person who took the photo. Is the mural itself PD and can this photo be kept if it is? — Marchjuly (talk) 13:06, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

The issue seems only to be that the photo in question is "Posted by Kansas Historical Society on public information site about the Kansas Capitol." A freer photo can be made of it, someone just has to walk in and take it which outside of COVID issues should be possible at any point. There's no special "3d" aspects here, the mural spanning 3 standard rectangular walls is not adding special artistic stuff too it (contrast to , say File:Felice Varini - 'Nine dancing triangles', France (Chateau Chasse-Spleen, Moulis en Medoc 2012. Photos by André Morin. Photocollage by Gil Dekel.jpg types of optical illusions (and even those may be PD). Its definitely not an architecture problem, as the Kansas Capital was completed in 1903 so that's out of copyright. It's just the need for a free image to be taken, which is fully possible. --Masem (t) 23:04, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look Masem. Do you think tagging with {{rfu}} would be OK here or would it be better to discuss at FFD? Another possibility might be to see if the uploader can get the WP:CONSENT of the copyright holder. I can ask and point them to WP:PERMISSION, but I'm not sure how that will play out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:15, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Given that it is easily replaceable (just not at the immediate time) I doubt a CONSENT is needed, I'd just rfu it. I'd only use that if it was a case of a hard-to-reacquire possible free image. --Masem (t) 23:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Egypt copyright law (1954)Edit

Hi there. I see User:Ashashyou has placed this image Mahmoud Khalil Al-Housary under public domain by the virtue of Egypt's 1954 law that was applicable on works published prior to 2002.

So, would the Qur'an (audio) recitations of the famous Egyptian reciters (El Minshawi, Al Hussary, Abdul Basit Abdus Samad, Mustafa Ismail) fall under public domain too, especially since most of them published their works well before 2002 regardless of whether anyone claims legal rights to the recitals (record companies or firms that acquired rights to the recordings post their deaths or secured rights in other countries)?


Originally asked here: User_talk:Ashashyou#Egypt_copyright_laws and here Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1068#Egypt_copyright_law_(1954).

The Dawoodi Bohra Geometric Shape and Text Logo CopyrightEdit

Hi, I see that Quora's logo is placed in the public domain because it is not originally creative and has a bunch of text / geometric shape to it (ref: Commons:File:Quora_logo_2015.svg).

I wanted to ask if this logo of could be in public domain, too? The reasoning is: The geometric pattern that forms the central theme of the logo is taken from one of the floral designs uncovered during the renovations of Al Anwar mosque of Cairo (see: Commons:File:Al-Hakim_Mosque_-_Cairo_2.jpg), and the rest of it is text.


Discussion at WT:NFCC § Colorized photos/screenshotsEdit

  You are invited to join the discussion at WT:NFCC § Colorized photos/screenshots. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:02, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

It would be nice to get some additional input on this because additional files keep getting updated by colorized versions. The faster is can be resolved the less of a chance that lots of cleanup will be needed. Many of the files being updated are non-free which means it won't be too long before the bots start flagging the now unused versions for speedy deletion per WP:F5. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Help regarding [[File:Mark Greaney at Rhodes College.jpg]]Edit

Hi there,

I am writing to ask for advice regarding File:Mark Greaney at Rhodes College.jpg on behalf of a friend, CarverSindile. CarverSindile is fairly new to Wikipedia and unfamiliar with the norms and protocols here. We just needed some advice on how to ensure that the image complies with Wikipedia policies including whether it is replaceable and what sort of licensing we can use for the image. Personally, I don't know whether the image can be used legally on Wikipedia. Was wondering if someone could advise us on how to resolve this matter. Thanks. Andykatib 10:02, August 4, 2020 (UTC)

Hi Andykatib. Non-free images of still living persons are pretty much never allowed per WP:NFCC#1 because it’s almost always consider reasonable for a free equivalent image that can serve the same encyclopedic purpose as a non-free one to be cremated or found per WP:FREER. There are sometimes exceptions to this allowed like those specified in item 1 of WP:NFC#UUI, but I don’t any of them would apply to this photo. So, unless you can get the WP:PERMISSION of the copyright holder and have them email their WP:CONSENT to Wikimedia OTRS, this file is likely going to end up be deleted as replaceable non-free use per WP:F7. Please note that for Wikipedia’s licensing purposes CONSENT basically means that the copyright holder is agreeing to allow anyone anywhere in the world to download the file and use it for any purpose (including commercial reuse and derivative use). The copyright holder can require that they be properly attributed by anyone reusing the file and that it be used under the terms of the license it’s released under, but that’s about it. So, “for non-commercial use only” or “for Wikipedia use only”, etc. types of licenses are not going to be accepted. Non-copyright related restrictions will not be accepted as well. Please refer to c:Commons:Licensing for more specific information. — Marchjuly (talk) 11:09, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Marchjuly. Thanks very much for your advise. Will pass this on to CarverSindile. The best idea would be to seek permission from the copyright holder. If not, it will probably have to be deleted per Wikipedia policy and process. Andykatib 11:16, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Andykatib: You're best bet here may be to contact a representative of the subject, which it looks like you can do via smiller It's a bit "in their own best interest" to have a Wikipedia article, and so they may be willing to release a photo under a Creative Commons license for use here. I...probably get a response 30% of the time I ask. But it's still better than nothing. GMGtalk 11:19, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, CarverSindile here, I emailed/messaged them but not sure if they will see it or reply to it. CarverSindile (talk) 00:00, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

1856 mapEdit

This 1856 map could be uploaded under {{PD-art}}, correct? Best wishes, Eddie891 Talk Work 18:24, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Eddie891: You would probably be better off using {{PD-old-100}} because that also covers countries outside the US. Convert the pdf to highest quality jpg or find original jpg or tif file and then upload that. ww2censor (talk) 11:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Use of court documents from California hosted by the Department of JusticeEdit

Hi! I am interested in determining if this document is in the public domain (PD), as well as whether individual photos in it are PD. In general I believe that documents released by the Department of Justice are PD. Though this particular document is labelled as from California, rather than the DoJ, I think this is usually not an issue either--California has very generous provisions.

The reason why I'm hoping to get a second opinion on this is that public records get tricky when they're court documents or related to criminal investigations (as I think this one is). Is this document in the PD? Are the included images?

If yes, then users have expressed interest in using at least one image.

Thanks for your help.

(Note: this question has been copied from Commons:Help desk) Jlevi (talk) 11:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Adding a magazine coverEdit

Can someone help with how to format Comics Buyer's Guide Fan Awards so that it lets me keep the image that was auto-deleted? I thought I used similar code from the parent article Comics Buyer's Guide but the JJMC89_bot didn't like it. I'm trying to include the image as an example of the magazine's cover that announced that year's winners. This previous version of the fan awards page is what I'm going for. Thanks! Wizardimps (talk) 04:49, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Wizardimps. The bot removed the file because it was lacking the separate specific non-free use rationale that's required by WP:NFCC#10c for the use in Comics Buyer's Guide Fan Awards. That's why the bot included a link to WP:NFC#Implementation in the edit summary it left when removing the file. So, all you need to do is provide a non-free use rationale for that particular use and the bot will stop removing the file.
Now, the question then is whether a valid non-free use rationale can be provided for such a use as explained in WP:JUSTONE. Generally, non-free magazine covers are allowed per item 1 of WP:NFCI when they're used for primary identification purposes in the main infobox or at the top of stand-alone articles about the magzaines they represent; however, "Comics Buyer's Guide Fan Awards" seems to be more about a type of award than a type of magazine; so, perhaps it would be better to use a logo for the awards (if one exists) than a image of a magazine issue about the awards. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Wizardimps: I highly doubt File:Cbg1600.png can pass the all 10 WP:NFCC policy criteria for use on Comics Buyer's Guide Fan Awards as Marchjuly suggests. Unless they had a special issue just for the awards, you are out of luck. Besides which not all article need or have images and as an encyclopaedia, illustrations are there to supplement the text not as decoration. ww2censor (talk) 10:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Screenshot from a webpage.Edit

I think the answer is no, but, I want guidance here. Trying to add some information to Air India Express Flight 1344, which is a developing story right now.

Specifically, I was thinking of a screenshot from FlightRadar24, of the playback data before the crash. Link to map here. The Screenshot will be zoomed into the crash site and will offer approx last 30 minutes view on the map, as a static image.

My preliminary view is that this is not allowed, but, I wanted to seek your guidance.

Ktin (talk) 19:06, 7 August 2020 (UTC)


This screenshot is nothing but colored text on a light blue background which seems simple enough for {{PD-simple}} or {{PD-logo}}? Is there some reason it needs to be non-free? -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:36, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


Can someone with more knowledge than me check this out and confirm if the public domain tags on it are applicable to this image.

  • The logo is for an organization set up in 1971 so the pre-1925 usage will not be valid - what else does this tag allow?
  • The not original enough template - according to Wikipedia:Logos, if an image created of simple text and simlple shapes is constructed to form a larger image then it is not free. The image CAMRA part of the logo forms a stylized tankard - is this sufficient to be original enough?

noq (talk) 16:53, 9 August 2020 (UTC)


File:Plymouth (automobile_logo).jpg might be PD. Do you think it is? --BlueCrabRedCrab (talk) 17:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC)