[WikiEN-l] "Permission required" on copyright expired images...

[Carcharoth]

Is that "date taken" or "date published"? This is why provenance of
photographs (both photographer and publication details, and dates) is
important. You should also make clear *who* is saying that this
photograph was taken in 1903. Sometimes publication and photographed
dates are mixed up. Also, the location where something is published
can be important.

To cut a long story short, the more details you have, the better. The
fewer details you have, the more difficult it is to be definitive
about anything. And the requirements at Wikipedia and Commons for as
many details as possible, and a tendency to delete if any of those
details are missing, can make it difficult sometime.

Carcharoth

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Sarah Ewart <sarahewart at gmail.com> wrote:
> Steve, that image is now PD in Australia. In Australia, the copyright of
> photographs taken prior to 1 January 1955 has expired and they are now in
> the public domain. The template for using PD Australian images on Wikipedia
> is here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-Australia and Commons -
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-Australia.
>
> There's some old discussion about the Australian libraries claiming
> permission requirements for reuse under the first section on the talk page
> of the template on Wikipedia
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:PD-Australia<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:PD-Australia>).
> It seems to be pretty much standard now for the Australian libraries (and
> other cultural institutions) to have similar permission notes on their
> websites, but sometimes their permission requirements are just ensuring they
> get credit for where the image came from and backlinks to their site.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Question for the copyright experts. See this image:
>> http://images.slsa.sa.gov.au/mpcimg/01000/B838.htm
>>
>> It's over 100 years old, and there is no clear copyright statement
>> (ie, the photographer isn't listed). Yet they say "Any other use
>> requires permission from the State Library of South Australia."
>>
>> 1) On what basis can they demand that users ask permission?
>> 2) In what circumstances can Commons or Wikipedia ignore such a
>> demand, and assert that the image is public domain or copyright
>> expired?
>> 3) What is the status of an image which is probably copyright, but no
>> one knows who owns the copyright?
>>
>> I realise that this case might be a bit borderline, so if you prefer,
>> imagine that the image was old enough that we could reasonably assume
>> the photographer has been dead more than 70 years.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>