File talk:Bosnia and Herzegovina's national anthem.ogg

In this article, we will delve into the fascinating world of File talk:Bosnia and Herzegovina's national anthem.ogg, exploring all its facets and relevant aspects. From its origins to its impact on today's society, we will address its evolution over time and its relevance in different contexts. In addition, we will analyze its role in different areas of study and its influence on various aspects of daily life. Along these lines, we will seek to understand and reflect on File talk:Bosnia and Herzegovina's national anthem.ogg from multiple perspectives, with the purpose of providing the reader with a comprehensive and enriching vision on this topic.

Restricting information and unofficial information

@Illegitimate Barrister: Please do not restrict information and speech freedom. There is not any problem with having this anthem full version as with other states. My only suggestion would be to remove text (English captions seen in the play box) from the audio file because the anthem has no official text and is played only intermezzo (what is its name too) on every official occasion, without singing or captioning. (The captions are given in both current full file and shortened version, so there is no reason to revert it by that means to previous version because nothing is accomplished that way.) --Obsuser (talk) 19:51, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

@Obsuser: Per WP:RAT, only a portion of a copyrighted song may be used under the fair-use principle. Thus, I deleted all full versions of the anthem and reverted to the 25 sec version. Please, do not try to replace the file with the full version as that would be a copyright violation. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:14, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
@Obsuser: Copyright trumps "freedom" on Wikipedia. Not my rule; it's Wikipedia's. I suggest you read up on the rules here; you've already been blocked once for violating them. – Illegitimate Barrister (talkcontribs), 22:20, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Obsuser. This has really nothing to do with censorship or speech freedom, but everything to do with Wikipedia's policy on using copyrighted content. Let me try to explain this is a different way. Every time you make an edit and click the "Publish changes" button, you're agreeing to the Wikimedia Foundation's wmf:Terms of Use. You can see this in the small print right above the "Publish changes" button. This means that you're agreeing to release any content you add to a Wikipedia page or upload to Wikipedia under the terms of Wikipedia's general licensing as explained in Wikipedia:Copyrights; so, if you want to upload a photo you've taken, a song you've written or anything else that you own the copyright on to Wikipedia under the term's of Wikipedia's licensing then you can as long as it's one 100% your own work, and clicking the "Publish changes" button is your way of agreeing to do this. On the other hand, if you want to upload content that you didn't 100% create yourself (i.e. the copyright of content is either entirely or partially held by a third-party), you can't do so without the copyright holder explicitly agreeing to the terms of Wikipedia's licensing. In other words, you can't take copyrighted content created by someone else and upload it to Wikipedia without their permission and then push the "Publish changes" button for them. There are certain exceptions to this, but these are really restricted. This is why you can't upload an entire CD of your favorite band, an entire movie of your favorite director, or a pdf file of an entire book written by your favorite author to Wikipedia. These are copyrighted works that can't be released under Wikipedia's licensing without the explicit consent of their copyright holders. Wikipedia's licensing pretty much allows all of the content found on it to be downloaded by anyone anywhere in the world at anytime and used for any purpose, including commercial purposes; so, your favorite band can upload all of their CDs to Wikipedia under a license accepted by Wikipedia if they really want to do so, but you can't do it for them without their permission.
Wikipedia does, however, allow certain bits and pieces of a copyrighted content to be uploaded as non-free content. This is because (English) Wikipedia's servers that host the content found on it are located within the United States, and US copyright law recognizes the content of fair use. Copyright laws vary from country to country and there are many countries which don't recognize fair use; so, the are many other language Wikipedias which don't accept any type of non-free content. Wikipedia's relevant policy on non-free content use is, however, much more restrictive than US copyright law, which is why Wikipedia only allows perhaps a few seconds of a song to be uploaded, a screenshot from a movie to be uploaded, or a short quote from a book or newspaper article to be added to an article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:38, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining, @Marchjuly:. – Illegitimate Barrister (talkcontribs), 02:56, 27 December 2019 (UTC)