The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that this image is in public domain, the cited source links to a Flickr image that says "All rights resesrved". Mosmof (talk) 04:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Senator Coltart has released this into the public domain. He took the picture and the main subject is his daughter Jessica. No case to answer. BScar23625 (talk) 17:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say that the image is in public domain? I don't see anything here and as already mentioned, the Flickr license says "All rights reserved". --Mosmof (talk) 23:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the owner of the picture has placed it on his own public website without any restriction stated - as such, he is deemed to have consented to its use; I don't see the relevance of the linkage to Flickr BScar23625 (talk) 08:33, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All intellectual property is copyrighted by default. And putting an image on a "public" website (how else would one publish without putting it in public?) does not remove that copyright. An image does not enter the public domain unless the owner explicitly releases the copyright. --Mosmof (talk) 13:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mosmof. Please understand that David is a professional politician. What would you say is the liklihood that he would object to the circulation of a picture of his supporters celebrating in front of one of his election posters?. Be honest. Please consider the possibility that you are being a little over-zealous here. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 14:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're convinced he won't mind, why don't you send him a letter asking him to release the image into public domain or re-license the image on Flickr? --Mosmof (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mosmof. Actually, I can e-mail him via his website. Leave that one with me. He is heavily engaged in the crisis negotiations so I won't expect an early reply. My contention remains that he has released the picture into the public domain by putting the picture onto his own publicity website. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 07:00, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't work like that. Just because something is used for publicity, it doesn't mean the owner gives up all rights to the image, which is what you would do by entering a work into the public domain. I think you're confusing making something available for the public with public domain. And the Flickr license, which is the only evidence of the owner's claim or otherwise to the image, clearly says "All rights reserved". --Mosmof (talk) 17:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mosmof. I hear what you say, but I think we will have to agree to differ on that one. I have e-mailed David, so let us await his reply. regards. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 08:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Yes, let's give it a grace period of a few more days to see if a license can be got; otherwise this is a very clear case for deletion. (I actually deleted it, mistaking this for an IfD rather than PUI listing, restored on purely procedural grounds for now.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- Senators are Federal employees, correct? When he is unning for re-election is that part of his job? So, if he took a picture, while he is campaigning, and it is part of his job, it should be in the public domain... Geo Swan (talk) 01:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by BanyanTree (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Highly unlikely that this news photo is licensed GFDL, or under any free license for that matter. Mosmof (talk) 04:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Withdrawing listing - the image was not GFDL, but PD according to Finnish law. The license information is now correct. Mosmof (talk) 20:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mosmof. The image is taken from the Finnish Defence Forces archive. Images from that source seem to be widely used in Finland related articles in Wikipedia and in the Finnish media generally - my understanding is that it is public domain. regards. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 08:25, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ps. See also Image:DeadFinnishcivilians1942.jpg, which is another image from the same source. The relevant issue here seems to be Finnish copyright law which causes copyight on any image (other than a work of art) to expire after 50 years BScar23625 (talk) 08:44, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the license to show its PD status. Thank you for pointing out the image from Commons. But in the future, please enter the correct license instead of simply tagging the image with GFDL. --Mosmof (talk) 20:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Claims PD but uses WP logo which is copyright WMF Q ^{T C} 04:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Permission is claimed, but no evidence of such or the GFDL license. Mosmof (talk) 04:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC) The permission was obtained from the site manager - but it is a members' gallery and it is difficult to find out who it was who originally posted the image and hence to obtain an unambiguous licence. So, I have taken this one down and the file can be deleted. Sorry for the trouble caused. BobBScar23625 (talk) 09:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I7 by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I8 by Akradecki (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image summary states the image copyright is "ultimately owned by the chicago police department", which would make it very likely NOT public domain. The watermark isn't very helpful either. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 06:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Except that the mugshot was not published with a copyright notice, so I think ((PD-Pre1978)) probably applies here. IronGargoyle (talk) 16:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know when and where it was actually published before 1978? Simply being created does not count as publication, and unpublished works can enjoy a long copyright term [1]. --dave pape (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This picture is taken by the Chicago Police Department and is released by the government as public domain. This is like all the mugshot pictures. Copyright ultimately belongs to the US federal government. Let it go and remove that disputed tag. 71.237.70.49 (talk) 00:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded new version of the image without that weird watermark. this should do it. plus this is dead person's photo and most of all a mugshot. mugshots are always safe. 71.237.70.49 (talk) 00:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you cite the relevant statute or case law which to back your point? Unless you can show otherwise, booking photos by state and local police departments are copyrighted, which is why we have a ((Non-free mugshot)) template. At the very least, the ((PD-USGov)) tag has to go. --Mosmof (talk) 01:50, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edited to add: the problem with this image is that the uploader doesn't seem to know the who or the when or the where of the image. Without that information, we can't determine its copyright status and it should really be tagged ((nsd)). If the mugshot is for a federal indictment, then the PD-USGov tag is correct, but if it's by the Chicago PD, then it's obviously not free. Mosmof (talk) 02:05, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I did some digging around, and according to this image archive, the photo is from his 1931 booking by the US Department of Justice (as in, not the Chicago Police Department), so the image is actually free. I've fleshed out the source information and re-licensed it as ((PD-USGov-DOJ)). So this is the rare case where the image is kept because the uploader was mistaken about its origins. --Mosmof (talk) 00:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image appears to be a news shot released on an official forum. I doubt the uploader owns the rights to it- no explanation has been given. J Milburn (talk) 10:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I1 by J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a screenshot, due to the 'replay' button. Uploader probably does not own the rights. J Milburn (talk) 12:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I1 by J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded along with Image:OnboardTRAC.jpg, which shows evidence of being a screenshot. Uploader probably does not own the rights to this picture. J Milburn (talk) 12:30, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I1 by J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded along with Image:OnboardTRAC.jpg, which shows evidence of being a screenshot. Uploader probably does not own the rights to this picture. J Milburn (talk) 12:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I1 by J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded along with Image:OnboardTRAC.jpg, which shows evidence of being a screenshot. Uploader probably does not own the rights to this picture. J Milburn (talk) 12:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I1 by J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded along with Image:OnboardTRAC.jpg, which shows evidence of being a screenshot. Uploader probably does not own the rights to this picture. J Milburn (talk) 12:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I1 by J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded along with Image:OnboardTRAC.jpg, which shows evidence of being a screenshot. Uploader probably does not own the rights to this picture. J Milburn (talk) 12:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I1 by J Milburn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded along with Image:OnboardTRAC.jpg, which shows evidence of being a screenshot. Uploader probably does not own the rights to this picture. J Milburn (talk) 12:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source page is a dud, no evidence of permission. J Milburn (talk) 12:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I3 by Skier Dude (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CC license is not a "release for Wikipedia use", and there is no evidence of release anyway. J Milburn (talk) 14:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC)License and wording changedMcallen123 (talk) 04:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC) I am the owner of the copyright and released itTonymagana (talk) 14:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changed this one to ((subst:npd)). Stifle (talk) 10:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rather odd sourcing information- old image, thumbnail, watermark. J Milburn (talk) 14:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 05:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshots of Second Life cannot be released as the work of the person who took them. J Milburn (talk) 15:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears they can (see next listing). Y Kept Stifle (talk) 10:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 05:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshots of Second Life are copyrighted as long as the game is. J Milburn (talk) 15:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Linden Lab has stated that Second Life users own the copyright to any objects they create in SL; see commons:Template:Second Life. So, if User:Prithwis created that building and landscape, he is able to license the screenshot freely. --dave pape (talk) 20:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And on top of that the game is GPL. Y Kept Stifle (talk) 10:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User has no right to release such a logo into the public domain. The image may be PD, I don't know, but it's certainly not PD just because the uploader said so. J Milburn (talk) 16:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a painting. Unlikely copyright is owned by uploader. J Milburn (talk) 19:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as F8 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT⚡ 05:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can see nothing at the source about CC. J Milburn (talk) 19:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nom withdrawn. J Milburn (talk) 19:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I asked the source to release the image under GFDL or CC license. My request , sent through the "contact us" link stated

Hello, I am a wikipedia contributor currently on the article on a building called India House,which was linked to the Indian independence movement. I have just come accross a picture of the house (http://www.londonremembers.com/memorial/?id=435) and was wondering if it at all might be possible to obtain a free license permission or a creative commons license to reuse this image on the article mentioned (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_House). I was wondering if it at all might be possible to reuse the image of the house The article is soon to be nominated for review and promotion to featured article status, which is a category reserved the best articles in wikipedia. However, I have not been able to find a picture of it since I myself live outside London, and requesting others is not helping. I will credit the author, and would sincerely appreciate your help.</blockqquote>

I recieved a reply today from a lady by the name of Richenda Walford replied stating

“

Rueben Happy to help. You are very welcome to use the picture, so long as www.LondonRemembers.com is given as the source. The pic on the website is only 46.5 kbs. I have a bigger version at 499 kbs, which I could send if you want it. You'll realise that in LondonRemembers I just skim the surface of all the subjects for whom I find memorials. Your article is so detailed and so on-the-button in relation to this memorial that I will add a link to it. All the best Richenda Walford www.LondonRemembers.com www.BrusselsRemembers.irisnet.be George Walford International Essay Prize: www.gwiep.net

”

I assumed this implied a cc license. I have now requested her to clarify that the image is indeed released under CC license, stating

“

Hello Richenda, A massive thanks for this. I think the version on the website will do. I'll let you know if a bigger version is more suitable. In the meantime, could I just clarify that you are releasing the image under a creative commons license? Please understand that wikipedia itself uses a Free Documentation License which means that its contents maybe copied by other sites. The CC license means London remembers will have to be credited as source even if this image is copied by others. Let me know. Lotsa thanks, rueben

”

I am happy to forard this email exchange if told how and who to send to. rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 19:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted as I9 by Chrislk02 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Poor source info, no proof of CC licensing. J Milburn (talk) 19:08, 13 August 2008 (UTC) What would be considered good source info?WorshipGuy22 (talk) 19:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Poor source info, no evidence of free license. J Milburn (talk) 19:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it is submitted by the author, wouldn't the copyright belong to the publisher? Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 21:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright belongs to the publisher. Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 21:27, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

contains possible unfree image in mplayer window _→AzaToth 22:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Stifle (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing about the image being PD on the source provided. J Milburn (talk) 22:08, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was: Delete; deleted by Angusmclellan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Permission seems to pretty clearly be for Wikipedia use only, not a release into the public domain. J Milburn (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're misreading the owner's intent. Taken as a whole, it reads: "Feel free to use any of our images on Loch Ewe, whatever that entails." Ottre (talk) 02:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the images's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.