This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wknight94 (talk | contribs) at 06:19, 21 November 2006 (+Image:Chaes.jpg with an explanation). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 06:19, 21 November 2006 by Wknight94 (talk | contribs) (+Image:Chaes.jpg with an explanation)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) edit
Images
- Image:White truck driver Reginald Denny.gif (history · last edit) from Ruy Lopez 01:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Image:Dennis Leeflang.jpg (history · last edit) from . The GFDL caim is bogus per copyright notice on source. Erik Swanson 04:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Image:Temrec.png (history · last edit) from Intellectual Reserve, Inc. This appears to be a photocopy of copyrighted material. In an un-redacted image of a LDS temple recommend "©2003 IRI" would appear in the lower-right hand corner of the "Signature of member of stake presidency or mission president" box. --FyzixFighter 04:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- A person handed me this card (which was / is folded in the middle); I scanned it on a personal copier. The only areas that I redacted (with PhotoShop ™; they are the areas filled in with black) were those that could identify the issuer and / or the holder of the card; there was no copyright notice on this card when I received it or returned it. This person did not wish to be associated with this image. Could you show an example of what you call an "un-redacted" card to prove that some may have a copyright notice? Remember, around Misplaced Pages, we verify. This is the first and only 'new' temple recommend I have seen in person; back a few years I saw them fairly often, but they were a different style then. If you do a Yahoo image search you can see much clearer examples of this card than what I scanned. Duke53 | 04:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- An example of an "un-redacted" image with copyright notice . For the admin investigating this, IRI can be contacted through information found on this page. --FyzixFighter 05:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- That link is a beauty but I neither downloaded nor copied anything from their site; I created this scan personally. Duke53 | 05:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Which makes it no less of an infringement. The original is a copyrighted document; the version posted is clearly an unauthorized reproduction in full. Doesn't matter who did it or whether a copyright notice appeared on the document; if they didn't have a license from the owner to make copies then the copies are illegal. alanyst 05:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- That link is a beauty but I neither downloaded nor copied anything from their site; I created this scan personally. Duke53 | 05:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- An example of an "un-redacted" image with copyright notice . For the admin investigating this, IRI can be contacted through information found on this page. --FyzixFighter 05:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- A person handed me this card (which was / is folded in the middle); I scanned it on a personal copier. The only areas that I redacted (with PhotoShop ™; they are the areas filled in with black) were those that could identify the issuer and / or the holder of the card; there was no copyright notice on this card when I received it or returned it. This person did not wish to be associated with this image. Could you show an example of what you call an "un-redacted" card to prove that some may have a copyright notice? Remember, around Misplaced Pages, we verify. This is the first and only 'new' temple recommend I have seen in person; back a few years I saw them fairly often, but they were a different style then. If you do a Yahoo image search you can see much clearer examples of this card than what I scanned. Duke53 | 04:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Image:Chaes.jpg (history · last edit) from .
- Image has had no copyright tag, then a fair use tag, and now {{PD-RU-exempt}}. The image does not appear to meet the criteria listed in PD-RU-exempt. As for fair use, there is at least one free image of Chernobyl available such as Image:Chernobyl2006.jpg which is perfectly acceptable IMHO, but has been removed from Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. —Wknight94 (talk) 06:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
