Commons:Deletion requests/File:Iraqi Kurdish village orchard near Turkish border.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Iraqi_Kurdish_village_orchard_near_Turkish_border.jpg[edit]

Copyright violation, Original photograph can be found here Rafy (talk) 22:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An older duplicate was also spotted at commons.
Rafy (talk) 22:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Keep the original (Hills south...) and  Delete the lower quality duplicate (Iraqi Kurdish...)
That is not the original photograph. It's an over-saturated 640x480 px version. The image was uploaded with User:Flickr upload bot, which means it's guaranteed to be tagged under a free license at upload, which in turn means it doesn't matter if the photographer changes the license later on because, as we all know, you can't withdraw your license from those who already use it. -- Orionist ★ talk 10:53, 15 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Comment So let me verify this because it seems too good to be true: If I take any picture on the web, crop it, saturate, and upload it under an appropriate license on flickr. Would it then be legal to use it in Commons? Even after I delete it there.
And by the way the original photograph clearly took this in Iran so at least a rename is needed. --Rafy (talk) 11:05, 15 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You understood this upside down. If you license your photo on Flickr with an acceptable CC license, and we upload it to Commons and verify the license (e.g. with Flickr upload bot), and after a while you decide that you want to sell your photos through Getty Images and change the license to "All rights reserved", it doesn't affect the image on Commons because it was uploaded under the old license which cannot be withdrawn. The higher res image is the one on Commons, which means it can't be a copy of the one on Flickr. That alone is enough reason to keep.
I have also had a look at the other file you linked (Hills south...), and it seems to be a tiny bit higher quality than the first one (Iraqi Kurdish...), it was hard to tell (size alone is sometimes misleading, due to JPEG bloat), so it's better to to keep the (Hills south...) if one of them to be deleted. -- Orionist ★ talk 12:54, 15 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What I meant is that I can upload any picture I wish to use to Flickr, even if I haven't taken it personally, and move it to commons. How would you know whether it's legally mine when I uploaded it there in the first place? I don't think modifying it makes it so. I'm just curious here to how flexible this can be. --Rafy (talk) 13:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It would depend on the license of the original picture and what modifications you have done. If you have done only minimal or no modifications, then you can't claim copyright on an image even if it was in the Public Domain (that's usually called Copyfraud). If you have modified a PD image, you can claim a new copyright and release or reserve all rights as you wish. If it's under an attribution license then you're a co-author, and if the license is ShareAlike you have to release under the same. However, if you violate the terms of the license in anyway, or if the image is not free in the first place and you do what you described above, then this is clearly a violation, and it's called Commons:Flickr washing. That's why Flickr uploads are reviewed by editors. Files suspected of Flickr washing should be nominated for deletion. You can find relevant pages and categories at Category:Commons. Flickr. Regards, -- Orionist ★ talk 14:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank for the info. From what I can tell from the EXIF info both images are copied from this one, wouldn't this be counted as flickr laundring? Rafy (talk) 16:18, 15 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No. The (Iraqi Kurdish...) file could've been copied from (Hills south...) here at Commons and the license terms followed at the Flickr page, which unfortunately doesn't exist anymore. The (Hills south...) file is attributed to the same author of the image you linked above. Again, the higher res file is on Commons, and that alone is enough reason to keep.


P.S. I did a thorough search here and found the following if you're in a mood to read:

Thanks for your efforts. It is very clear now. Though I still think that this one should be deleted since it is a duplicate and has a misleading title. Rafy (talk) 22:01, 15 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As long as you keep the original (Hills south...) you can delete the rest. You can also use {{Duplicate}} to tag other low-res duplicates left over from the FP nomination years ago. I changed my vote accordingly. Regards, -- Orionist ★ talk 00:20, 17 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: see above      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:35, 23 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Iraqi_Kurdish_village_orchard_near_Turkish_border.jpg&oldid=50507777"