PD claimed but appears to be a professional publicity shot or similar. Note that uploader also has a history of uploading copyvios. Kurt Shaped Box 00:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as a BSD licensed software screenshot, but it's not a software screenshot and the PDF it was taken from only say "©2002 International Truck and Engine Corporation, Warrenville, IL 60555", no mention of BSD or any other free license. Sherool (talk) 11:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I listed it as a screenshot because I couldn't find PDFs listed under the license types. It says Here that images may be used in a manner that is not detrimental to the company. I have emailed the appropriate person.--Lpimlott 18:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then what you are looking for may be ((promo)) (if it's a promotional image). // Liftarn

Thanks. added the tag--Lpimlott 04:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader claims this is a software screenshot available under "free license", but the only mention of copyright on the source site is "©2002-2007 The Stanley Works, All Rights Reserved." Sherool (talk) 11:13, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

insufficient permission, and it doesn't sound like the webmaster was the copyright owner anyways. if it's nonfree it should be deleted because it doesn't add significantly to the article. Calliopejen1 13:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The same goes for Image:Branham 1.jpg Image:Branham preaching.png and Image:Dennis clark.jpg. Rettetast 21:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

derivative work. Not free Rettetast 19:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The uploaders is removing this so I will explain better. The uploader has used a copyrighted image and modified it and has released it under a free license. This is clearly a derivative work of the original image and therefore not a free image. To User:The sunder king: Please don't remove this nomination. You can add your opinion below. Rettetast 20:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This image is my work, there is no need to delete it. The sunder king 20:24, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, after looking at the image description, this is a derivative work, and as such is bound by any copyrights placed on the original image. I'm afraid that this is indeed unfree. The Hybrid T/C 14:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence of creative commons license Rettetast 19:25, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, obviously wrong license. Pascal.Tesson 21:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]