User talk:Skyhead
Missing file information
Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.
Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.
Are you the creator of image File:Radwege Bochum 198x.jpg ?
Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?
Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".
Doing this would be already very useful.
Licensing - photos
In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?
In case where it is a photo you have taken then you can make it available under a specific free license (except some cases, like photos of modern sculptures in coutries without freedom of panorama or taking photo of copyrighted artwork).
Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?
Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?
If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.
You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self|Skyhead}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.
Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified 2022, June}} from the file page.
Licensing - other images
If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.
See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.
note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.
note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.
Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.
Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.
Help
Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.
Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).
If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.
(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)
--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:40, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Answer =
I took this photo by myself. The map on this photo is a modified leasure-map of the city of Bochum, where I added those cycle ways, which I have found in the 1980s in Bochum by cycling through Bochum. The information about the map is already available at this file, but in German. (I assumed, that nobody else than people of Bochum would be interested in this map.)
Licensing of this photo is not quite clear to me. On the one hand I had taken this photo and modified the map by myself. If I could, I would put it under free license for use for everyone. On the other hand the basic map has been created by the city of Bochum and I have bought it. I have added the cycleways on this map, and this is the major information of this photo. May I give a license for a photo of this map? This is not clear to me.
On the other hand: this photo was part of a cycleway project in cooperation with the city of Bochum. The basic leasure map is more than 40 yers old and I don't know if such old maps are free for publishing in the meantime. Maybe I had got the right of modifying it and publishing the modifications by buying the basic map, but I don't know it.
And - this photo has been put to a project internal discussion side for project internal use. O.k. in the meantime this map has been refered in the project report, but not with this photo.
Skyhead (talk) 13:49, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- 40 years old is sadly not enough to expire copyright. And would not qualify for either https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-anon-70-EU https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-EU-no_author_disclosure https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-old-70
- One option would be to claim it does not qualify for copyright in the first place ({{PD-shape}}) but this seems dubious
- There is one more option: claim that it is copyrighted, not available under free license but irreplaceable and really needed and claiming "fair use" or equivalent. Is there such case here?
- Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 04:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Missing file information
Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.
Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.
Are you the creator of image File:Radwege Bochum 198x NO.jpg ?
Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?
Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".
Doing this would be already very useful.
Licensing - photos
In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?
In case where it is a photo you have taken then you can make it available under a specific free license (except some cases, like photos of modern sculptures in coutries without freedom of panorama or taking photo of copyrighted artwork).
Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?
Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?
If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.
You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self|Skyhead}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.
Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified 2022, August}} from the file page.
Licensing - other images
If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.
See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.
note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.
note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.
Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.
Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.
Help
Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.
Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).
If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.
(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)
--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:37, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
My Problem
Hello,
The problem in giving licensing information is as follows: The image consists of several items
- The photo has been taken by me - no licensing problem
- The additions in the map (cycleways) have been done by me - no licensing problem
- The basic map - copyright 1978 by the city of Bochum, licensed for SPD Bochum for reprint 1980 - how to license it?
For 2 of these items licensing is clear, I would give an open license. But for the basic map I don't own the copyright. Am I allowed to give an open license for the photo including this map?
This is not clear to me. How would you propose to handle this problem?
May I give an open license including the basic map, because the majority of the work at it has been doen by me?
May I give an open license because the copyright of the basic map doesn't matter (more than 40 years old, City of Bochum is no longer license owner because of reprint by SPD Bochum)?
Or must I give a special license, which takes into account the open issue with the basic map ?
Skyhead (talk) 11:33, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- "The basic map - copyright 1978 by the city of Bochum, licensed for SPD Bochum for reprint 1980 - how to license it?" - it is almost certainly on unfree license, so things from that map cannot be copied into OSM. If that file is critical and must be kept, then it falls to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki#Designing_policy_for_handling_files_without_clear_license
- If that file is unfree, critical and must be kept then ideally would be described on its file page why we need it Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Missing file information
Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.
Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.
Are you the creator of image File:Radwege Bochum 198x SW.jpg ?
Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?
Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".
Doing this would be already very useful.
Licensing - photos
In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?
In case where it is a photo you have taken then you can make it available under a specific free license (except some cases, like photos of modern sculptures in coutries without freedom of panorama or taking photo of copyrighted artwork).
Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?
Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?
If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.
You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self|Skyhead}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.
Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified 2022, December}} from the file page.
Licensing - other images
If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.
See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.
note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.
note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.
Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.
Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.
Help
Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.
Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).
If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.
(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)
--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:10, 7 December 2022 (UTC)