Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 October 4#File:SonsOfMIT.ogg

: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 {{admin|Skier Dude}} AnomieBOT⚡ 01:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

::File:Timebar schedule.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Timebar schedule.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3APossibly+unfree+files%2F2010+October+4%23File%3ATimebar+schedule.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Timebar schedule.jpg|action=history}} history] | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ATimebar+schedule.jpg}} logs]).

• Provided for educational purposes only. Stifle (talk) 09:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

: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 {{admin|Skier Dude}} AnomieBOT⚡ 01:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

::File:Prakash Raj.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Prakash Raj.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3APossibly+unfree+files%2F2010+October+4%23File%3APrakash+Raj.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Prakash Raj.jpg|action=history}} history] | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3APrakash+Raj.jpg}} logs]).

• Copyvio uploader, likely not own work. --Martin H. (talk) 14:00, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

: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 {{admin|Explicit}} AnomieBOT⚡ 01:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

::File:SonsOfMIT.ogg ([{{fullurl:File:SonsOfMIT.ogg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3APossibly+unfree+files%2F2010+October+4%23File%3ASonsOfMIT.ogg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:SonsOfMIT.ogg|action=history}} history] | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3ASonsOfMIT.ogg}} logs]).

• This is a tricky one. This audio file was ripped from an old record and uploaded by a now banned user (User:Piercetheorganist) as PD-self. So, the PD-self tag is clearly incorrect, since the mere act of ripping does not confer copyright ownership on the ripper. Now the question is: is this file in the PD? Here are the considerations:
• The source record is not well-described. The date is given as "early 20th century," but that's not very helpful. We know that the words and lyrics were written by [http://stuff.mit.edu/afs/sipb/user/marthag/text/humor/mitsongsC.html John B. Wilbur class of 1926], so the recording is probably not prior to 1923, so {{tl|PD-1923}} is out.
• {{tl|PD-US-no notice}} I have been unable to locate a scan of this record to see if there is a (c) notice on it. This search is complicated, since we don't have a lot of information on the record.
• {{tl|PD-US-not renewed}}? I haven't been able to locate this record in any of the standard copyright renewal databases ([http://collections.stanford.edu/copyrightrenewals/bin/page?forward=home Stanford]). If this record is from the 1920s, then it would have to have been renewed 28 years later, so at some time in the 1950s. Since we don't have the exact date of the record's printing, we'd have to sift through thousands of pages of renewal notices for this time entire period. Again, that search is further complicated because we don't know the exact terms to search.
• Unless someone can substantiate a claim of PD for this file, I think it should be deleted. Especially since the uploader has been banned, so he can't offer any more evidence for us. (see an earlier discussion at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#File:SonsOfMIT.ogg.)--GrapedApe (talk) 18:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

: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 {{admin|Explicit}} AnomieBOT⚡ 06:08, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

::File:Kochi Port1.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Kochi Port1.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3APossibly+unfree+files%2F2010+October+4%23File%3AKochi+Port1.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Kochi Port1.jpg|action=history}} history] | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AKochi+Port1.jpg}} logs]).

• Identical image appears on Mumbai Mirror website at http://cms.mumbaimirror.com/portalfiles/21/83/200912/Image/port%208.jpg no reason to believe a newspapaper would release into the public domain MilborneOne (talk) 20:55, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

: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 discussion was: Keep, tagging non-free. Someone will need to apply the necessary rationale. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 12:20, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

::File:Clement Davies.jpg ([{{fullurl:File:Clement Davies.jpg|action=delete&wpReason=%5B%5BWikipedia%3APossibly+unfree+files%2F2010+October+4%23File%3AClement+Davies.jpg%5D%5D}} delete] | talk | [{{fullurl:File:Clement Davies.jpg|action=history}} history] | [{{fullurl:Special:Log|page=File%3AClement+Davies.jpg}} logs]).

• Claimed to be covered by (expired) Crown Copyright but the source URL contradicts the assertion it was created by the United Kingdom Government. 87.194.6.158 (talk) 22:49, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

• It's easy enough to decide that this Elliott & Fry picture isn't free. It's less easy to determine when it will be free or whether any of the other images of Davies the NPG has are now free. The 1936 Bassano photographs may have been in the public domain since 2007, and the Elliott & Fry ones may be expected to be in the public domain in 2025, iff the studios owned the copyrights. If Davies owned the rights, which he may well have done if he paid to have them taken, then all of the NPG photographs will not be in the public domain until 70 years following Davies' death at the earliest, that is to say in 2033. In that case we may as well tag this one non-free and stick with it. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:55, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

: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.