Wikipedia talk:Non-free content

Active discussions
WikiProject Fair use  (Inactive)
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Fair use, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.

Can I upload CNN and NYT website screenprints?Edit

Hi. I want to illustrate some graphical layout solutions through screenprints, I made, from the CNN and NYT websites. Their actual contant is not essential (and to be used off-mainspace only, FWIW). Can I upload such screenprints at all, and if so with which precautions? -DePiep (talk) 20:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Their actual contant is not essential (and to be used off-mainspace only, FWIW). No, especially not with these caveats. --Izno (talk) 20:59, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
If by screenprints you mean c:COM:Screenshots, then most likely they would be copyrighted content that only could be uploaded and used in accordance with WP:NFCC. Non-free content can only be used in the mainspace per WP:NFCC#9; so, without knowing anymore, I would say you probably can’t do this.
If by screenprint, you mean test card, then possibly yes but that would depend upon whether the pattern would be considered copyright eligible, which might depend on whether it has any copyright eligible elements (e.g. network logos) in it. — Marchjuly (talk) 21:05, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
From the above comments this does sound like where a free mock-up to illustrate may be a reasonable replacement. --Masem (t) 21:11, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
OK, a no then. Thanx. -DePiep (talk) 21:13, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Images of recently deceased individualsEdit

Hello NFCC people etc. Just wanted to start a quick chat around what the community believes is realistic when it comes to posting fair use images of recently deceased people. I've always been a believer in allowing some time (e.g. a few months) to find images on other websites or through family etc, which people are prepared to re-license as CC-BY-SA 3.0 or whatever. I've done it myself a couple of times with success. What I do find, at WP:ITNC for instance, is that people are uploading images of people who are one or two days dead (or even five or six weeks dead) who have clearly been in the public eye and for whom quick Google image searches reveal they are not in any sense reclusive. Can we find a way to determine what backs up NFCC criterion 1 in an objective way? E.g. could we create a checklist of things people should do before declaring "no, no way we can ever get a free-to-use image"? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

We just had a recent discussion this after George Floyd's death [1]. What I think we can distinguish is two fold:
  • For recently deceased that would have met WP:PUBLICFIGURE, there definitely should be a period of 3-6 months - the same timeframe that BLP applies to recently deceased - that we expect some effort to be made to find a previously made free image, which could include contacting family and friends after giving enough time for mourning to ask for freely licensed photos.
  • Otherwise, the situation of whether we actually need a photo of a non-public figure needs to be strongly considered, and if a photo is still considered, we should still be waiting some time before a non-free is used (again, giving time to seek out freely licensed), but because the likeliness of public images will be lower, the time doesn't need to be as long. But it should be far more than "a few days". At least 2 months if not 3 IMO. --Masem (t) 22:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay, Masem, thanks for your thoughts. The point here really is not to rehash old discussion, but to look to build into the criteria some objective statements that enable us to draw a line. Right now, it appears to me that the discussion over fair use images of recently deceased people isn't adequately described. It also appears that the discussion to which you lilnked reaches no conclusion whatsoever. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, unfortunately when we tried to enforce it for an image of George Floyd, I think there were too many !votes favoring to keep despite non-free policies all saying to wait, which is why its a hard area. I can see Floyd being a special case due to what developed from that. But we've long had a non-written rule of thumb about the expectation of not using non-frees for the recently deceased for the same period that BLP applies. --Masem (t) 23:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
@Masem: Since you've participated in the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Images#Request for Comment, you might have noticed my posts. There seems to be some participating in that discussion who feel that a non-free should be preferred to even a "free equivalent" image in cases where the non-free provide a better representative image of the person as they appeared in at the peak of their popularity or as they are most remembered. I think some feel that this should be the case even if the person in question is still living. Maybe the time has come to clarify FREER and the meaning of "free equivalent" a bit. I also participated in the Floyd discussion and, even though it might a special case, many of the others who also participated (as you point out) didn't really give much weight to NFCC-based arguments and instead felt the more pressing need to identify someone asap should take precedance. The Floyd discussion you linked above actually was the result of an FFD about the file in question, and it was from that FFD's close that it was being claimed that a new consensus had been established and that way FREER has been interpreted over the years was flawed. I'm not trying re-hash those discussions again, but it might be time to discuss whether FREER needs to be tweaked to reflect the chaging times. Just also want to note that in some ways the disagreement over the infobox image taking place at Talk:Elliot Page is also kind of connected to this and I think is partly why the RfC on MOS:IMAGES was started. The are plenty of free images of "Ellen Page", but there don't seem to be any currently available of "Elliot Page"; so, some of the posts seem to be advocating finding one asap for the main infobox regardless. Obviously, this would probably be fairly easy to do if a non-free could be used, but that runs into FREER and how a "free content equivalent with an acceptable quality sufficient to serve the encyclopedic purpose" is being interpreted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
At least with the Page case and the RFC you note, that's where the WMF's specific advice on BLP images comes into play, and that's usually what many editors "respect". But as soon as the person takes their last breath, some editors feel that that's the end of the possible free image availability, but we've always argued that there's a reasonable search that should be done if no documentable search had been done before. (The example here was, up to a few years ago, Kim Jong-un, who we know we've spent several editor-hours trying to find a free image with no luck, such that if he had died, we'd have been fully justified to use a non-free right then and there. But then he made several state visits that got us free images galore resolving that issue). --Masem (t) 02:37, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Return to the project page "Non-free content".