File talk:Swarnalatha.jpg

In this article we are going to analyze in detail File talk:Swarnalatha.jpg, a topic that has aroused great interest in contemporary society. From its origins to its impact today, File talk:Swarnalatha.jpg has been the subject of debate and research in different areas. Over the years, File talk:Swarnalatha.jpg has influenced the way we perceive the world around us and has played a crucial role in the evolution of various areas of knowledge. Through this article, we will seek to understand the meaning, importance and implications of File talk:Swarnalatha.jpg, as well as its relevance in the current context. We will break down its different facets, explore its multiple applications and analyze its impact on society.

Swarnalatha

Image is not in public domain, and its taken from a copyrighted source, 60 years required for the image to enter in the public domain. Non-Free use for this image can only be applicable where it meets 8 rules of wiki. --Kalarickan (talk) 10:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Thats not actually true. Although the work is copyrighted, a low-resolution version of the image can be used to specify the subject of the article provided a free content is not available or cannot be generated. Swarnalatha is no more and so no free photographs of her can be generated. Please see the licensing section of the image for more details. --Sreejith K (talk) 10:31, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Re:

Image cannot be used as it doesn't come under the 8 rules of wiki, Free content may be available somewhere outside, we dont know. Only a dead persons picture can be published if it complies with the indian copyright act. if it is not all can upload anybody's image in Non-free category (May be a low res). I prefer this questions should ask to a wikiexpert for photograph..--Kalarickan (talk) 10:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Not at all true: United States fair use law allows it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:30, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

origin of the image & the personnels nationality is not USA. The image should be deleted as it violates the copyright. Or it can be kept by keeping the transfer of copyright from the sourced website to the original uploader...--Kalarickan (talk) 20:49, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I cannot speak for India's fair use laws. But Wikipedia is housed in the USA, and as such we allow it. Can you please check out WP:FU before responding? Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:24, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Accepted

All are going to benefit wikipedia, but still there is chance in India to file a case against wiki, If the images are coming on wiki without getting the approval from the publisher/photographer. As the published image didn't tell that it can be ued in a fair-use agreement. Any way i am going to upload some important photographs under Fair use. Kalarickan (talk) 16:12, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Another's thoughts

I'm responding here at the request of Kalarickan. The use of this image here meets both the conventional interpretation (on Wikipedia) of legal fair use of copyrighted images and is a fairly common type of use of a non free image (photo of a deceased person) to illustrate articles. That said I am concerned that it fails two of the non-free content criteria. #2 in that this appears to be a press image that may be used in violation of WP:NFCC#2. The other concern is that she is a widely photographed person and I can see no evidence that a diligent quest to obtain a free image has been conducted. Just because someone has died does not prevent the finding nor creating of free image - It is arguable that this image fails WP:NFCC#1 - Peripitus (Talk) 23:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I firmly disagree that a press photo would normally fail #2, and given that she is passed away, it's not likely IMHO #1. Because it's a pretty complex case, either of you might want to consider WP:FFD in place of {{subst:dfu}}. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:48, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Good for all

I think, there is still confusion, but i have a question. As per Indian laws (copyright) this image will not win on the fair-use conditions, and anyone can put a case against wiki...We all should investigate properly and close/hide this image till it resolves..--Kalarickan (talk) 05:25, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Indian law is irrelevant. The Wikipedia servers are governed by United States federal law and Florida state law. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:55, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I cannot agree on that, as wikipedia is respecting and following many countries laws (eg: Public domain in india, political peoples images etc). For keeping an image we cannot say that the law didnt cover wikipedia..--Kalarickan (talk) 14:41, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way, but Wikipedia does not, by policy. See Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights: While Wikipedia prefers content which is free anywhere in the world, it accepts content which is free in the United States even if it may be under copyright in some other countries. The Hindi Wikipedia most likely will follow Indian law, but English is the primary language in the US, so we go by US law. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:46, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Green tickY This is a quite complex issue and cannot be resolved as some part of wikilaws allows it and some part discourage the use, Untill such copyright claim arrive here, this image can be kept...--Kalarickan (talk) 09:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikious
Boobota
Sagapedia