File talk:The Heinz bottle.JPG
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Stefan2 in topic Restored licensing information
Restored licensing information
edit
How can we restore a creative commons license? The license for this image is {{Non-free logo}}. A non-free image cannot be released under creative commons. Ryan Vesey 17:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#File:The Heinz bottle.JPG.
- One thing is certain: If you want to use this photograph, you can't remove the photographer's license. That would constitute a copyright violation.
- A possible exception would be if you used the photograph in fair use in the context of an article about the photographic work of the photographer. Currently, this is not the case, as the photograph is merely used in an article about something that is pictured on the photo.
- If you disagree with the application of the rationale of the Ets-Hokin judgment to this photograph, then you should tag the file for deletion. But violating the photographer's copyright by removing the licensing information is not an option.
- This photograph would probably be accepted on Commons anyway, the rationale being that the photo can be reused freely under the free license, as long as the possibly copyrighted elements are not specifically isolated from the context.
- I agree with Asclepias. Although the photographer gets a copyright in the photo, which is why the CC license is needed, I don't think there's anything on or about the bottle that makes this a derivative of a copyrighted work. I think this would be acceptable on Commons. Also, since it was mentioned in the linked discussion, I'd be pretty confident in saying that the logo File:Heinz.svg lacks sufficient originality to be copyrightable in the US (compare it to known uncopyrightable works, such as File:Best Western logo.svg). cmadler (talk) 19:07, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
- This appears to be a product from the United States. When was this particular design first used? If it was first used before 1 March 1989, and if there wasn't any copyright notice on the bottle at that time, then the bottle is unquestionably in the public domain in the United States. The United States has a fairly high threshold of originality (see the examples at Commons:COM:FOP#United States), so I doubt that the bottle is copyrightable even if the design was made after 1 March 1989. See also Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Wine labels which is similar. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:48, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Asclepias. Although the photographer gets a copyright in the photo, which is why the CC license is needed, I don't think there's anything on or about the bottle that makes this a derivative of a copyrighted work. I think this would be acceptable on Commons. Also, since it was mentioned in the linked discussion, I'd be pretty confident in saying that the logo File:Heinz.svg lacks sufficient originality to be copyrightable in the US (compare it to known uncopyrightable works, such as File:Best Western logo.svg). cmadler (talk) 19:07, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
