User:Rat/Grand Unified Image License Tagging


 * That said, you are free to copy this, and modify your copy, under the terms of the GFDL or Creative Commons-Attribution-ShareAlike.

First of all, I'm not a lawyer. This guide is mainly to explain community policy, and guide you to pages that explain the legal reasons for the community policy.


 * What is copyright?
 * Copyright is a right granted by governments to allow a creator to control distribution of their creative work. Copyright does not cover distribution of facts, but it can cover the wording of a specific report of the facts. Copyright only protects a work for a limited time, then the work becomes public domain.
 * Wikipedia article about Copyright
 * Copyright myths


 * What is a license?
 * Anything creative a person makes is automatically copyrighted. Other people are extremely limited in what they can do with someone's else's copyrighted work. A license tells other people that as long as they follow the conditions laid out in the license, the creator won't use their ownership of the copyright against other users of the creative work. If the users don't follow the conditions in the license, the copyright-holder can use all their rights under copyright against the person who violated the license.
 * License tags are also used to indicate where an image is fair use, or in the public domain.


 * So what do I do?
 * Every image has a wiki page where text can be written to describe the image. For instance Image:TheNice_logo.jpg - this page says where the image is from and who made it, as well as a fair-use template. A template consists of the template name in curly braces, like - When the page containing the template tag is viewed, the wiki software substitutes the text on the template page; in this case, the page Template:Logo. The rest of this page will help you decide which template applies. Once you figure it out, edit the description page for the image to include the template, and any supporting information the template needs.
 * Wikipedia Help page about Image pages - note that not everything here is policy on WikiFur

I own it
The image you want to upload is your own work.

Do you really own the copyright
You may not own the copyright on the image like you think. But if you find that you don't own the copyright, don't despair, and skip to the section on fair use.

Art you have bought or commissioned
Copyright is not transferred unless explicitly stated so. When you pay an artist for a print or commission without any agreement otherwise, you are likely only getting permission for personal use. In order to transfer the copyright, you'd need the artist to sign a contract, or a written statement assigning the copyright to you(for example, Marci McAdam explictly states on her website that "The copyright for a badge belongs to the person whose commission it is."). This also applies to drawings of your "character/fursona" (if you have one done). Though if the drawing uses a copyrighted creative work of yours, it may be a derivative work (see below), and both of you have to agree to any distribution.
 * Wikipedia article on "works for hire", which is what a commission may or may not be

Scans/screenshots
When you scan a work into your computer, or take a screenshot of a video, you do not create a new copyright. Copyright is awarded for creativity, not effort. The copyright of the scan/screenshot you took is still completely owned by the original creator, and only they have say over the terms of use. If the work you scanned or captured in a screenshot is public domain, your scan or screenshot is still public domain
 * Wikipedia article on Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., a case which decided on the fact that creativity, not effort, was to be taken into account when deciding copyright

Photographs
If you take a straight-on photograph of a two-dimensional work like a drawing or painting, you are likely not creating any new copyright, and the original copyright of the original creator of the work in likely the only copyright that applies. Again, copyright is awarded for creativity, not effort. However, with three-dimensional works, like sculptures, statues, architectural works, plush toys, action figures, and so on, there is a new copyright created when you photograph it. Your choice of composition, angle, arranging the shot and so on, is considered creative. However, the copyright of the original object does not go away. The photo is considered a derivative work, and unless there is some reason otherwise, both the photographer, and the creator of the object would have to agree in order for the photo to be distributed. But for most of our purposes here, we just need the permission of the photographer, because we can claim fair use, which is described below.
 * Wikipedia article on Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., a case which decided on the fact that creativity, not effort, was to be taken into account when deciding copyright

Derivative works
When a person creates an original copyrighted work, they also have copyright over all the ways it can be recast or adapted. For instance, you draw a new picture of Donald Duck, it is a derivative work, and both you and Disney would have to agree in order for there to be any distribution of the picture. Anytime you use creativity from something that is still under copyright, you create a derivative work, and both you and the creator of the original work would have to agree in order to distribute it.
 * Guidelines for derivative works on WikiMedia commons - note that not all policies on Commons are rules here.

You own the copyright
Great! Now I'm going to take a moment to say something. When people upload text to WikiFur, they agree to license it under the GFDL. That means it's not just usable by the WikiFur website, but anyone who can follow the conditions of the GFDL can use it. The GFDL only requires that redistributors credit the original author(s), provide a copy of the GFDL, and allow other users to use the work under the GFDL. They can print in in book format, sell it on a CD-ROM, or set up a new website hosting the latest available copy. When you upload your own work, we kindly ask you to release it under terms at least as free as the GFDL.

Permission to use on WikiFur
You've read the previous section and you still want to release it to WikiFur only. We can understand that, for instance, with a real-life picture of yourself, you might not want to allow just anyone to use it. Do be aware, however, that there are people who may use your image without respecting your terms. If you just can't have anyone else using your image, you may not want to put your image on the public Internet at all.

For articles about community-owned culture, where we want the articles to be freely distributable, like Terms or Species, we may not want to accept these "Permission to use on WikFur" images.


 * For photographs of wikfur users (wikifurries) that have given permission to use their photos on this wiki. Note: Technically, the copyright of the image belongs to the photographer, not the subject. But if the subject asserts that their permission is all that's required, we'll take their word for it that they've taken the picture themselves or worked something out with the photographer in order to obtain a copy of the image. If you could credit the photographer and specify the terms under which they allowed the image to be used, that'd be appreciated. If we have reason to believe that the usage isn't approved of by the photographer, we'll probably take it down.
 * For photographs of wikfur users (wikifurries) that have given permission to use their photos on this wiki. Note: Technically, the copyright of the image belongs to the photographer, not the subject. But if the subject asserts that their permission is all that's required, we'll take their word for it that they've taken the picture themselves or worked something out with the photographer in order to obtain a copy of the image. If you could credit the photographer and specify the terms under which they allowed the image to be used, that'd be appreciated. If we have reason to believe that the usage isn't approved of by the photographer, we'll probably take it down.


 * You user space isn't like the articles that we want to be mostly reusable by others. So as long as you're not violating copyright, we don't mind too much if the images aren't redistributable. But keep it reasonable; we aren't an image host.
 * You user space isn't like the articles that we want to be mostly reusable by others. So as long as you're not violating copyright, we don't mind too much if the images aren't redistributable. But keep it reasonable; we aren't an image host.


 * This template lets you specify that the image can only be used under some specific terms. If the terms are too onerous though, we may just decide it's not worth having the image at all. Whatever terms there are, there are two that we cannot accept at all, as they are forbidden by our host. Non-Commercial-use-only images are forbidden. Non-Derivative-use-only (images where it is not permitted to make modifications) are forbidden.
 * Page on our previous host, Wikia, showing that Non-commercial and Non-derivative-use-only licenses are forbidden (now the status of Non-Commercial images is debatable, but No-Derivatives licenses are still highly unlikely to be compatible with wikis)
 * The template can be used either with or without linking to an external license document. Substitute the correct author and license conditions into the template.
 * Linking to an external license:
 * Not linking to an external license:
 * Not linking to an external license:

Free licenses
When you put your own work under a free license, you still own the copyright. You can still copy, sell, and distribute your own work. You may want to inform others that the work is also under a free license, but that's up to you. You may multi-license your work (which means that as long as users follow either "license A" or "license B", you will allow the use of your work.)

If someone violates your license, you can use your copyright to force them to comply with the license or take your work down. The copyright-holder has to be the one to take action against the violator(other people can't do it for you.)

When you release your work under a free license, you should start off the license section by making it clear that you are the copyright holder and are providing information on how you are licensing the images.

Here are the licenses:


 * This asserts that you allow any use, even commercial use and derivative works, but that you receive attribution(some sort of footnote saying you are the creator of the work). Note that this license does not say how you should be attributed, or what should be done in the case of derivative works. You may want to use one of the licenses that are more detailed, like the Creative Commons licenses, if you just want attribution.
 * Why you may choose to use this license: If you would just like to be credited for you work, but don't care about the details.
 * Why you may choose to use this license: If you would just like to be credited for you work, but don't care about the details.


 * These two both allow any use, even commercial use, and derivative works, with no compensation, and do not even require that you get attribution for your work. One asserts that you still own the copyright, but allow any use; the other asserts that you are releasing the work into the public domain, where works have no copyright.
 * Why you may choose to use this license: If you don't care at all about how your work is used, or even whether you are credited. This makes it the easiest to reuse.
 * These two both allow any use, even commercial use, and derivative works, with no compensation, and do not even require that you get attribution for your work. One asserts that you still own the copyright, but allow any use; the other asserts that you are releasing the work into the public domain, where works have no copyright.
 * Why you may choose to use this license: If you don't care at all about how your work is used, or even whether you are credited. This makes it the easiest to reuse.


 * These are Creative Commons licenses. The different version numbers aren't too significant (you can check to see exactly what the differences are if you like). ShareAlike(SA) means that any derivative works have to be licensed under the same license as the original.
 * These are Creative Commons licenses. The different version numbers aren't too significant (you can check to see exactly what the differences are if you like). ShareAlike(SA) means that any derivative works have to be licensed under the same license as the original.
 * These are Creative Commons licenses. The different version numbers aren't too significant (you can check to see exactly what the differences are if you like). ShareAlike(SA) means that any derivative works have to be licensed under the same license as the original.
 * These are Creative Commons licenses. The different version numbers aren't too significant (you can check to see exactly what the differences are if you like). ShareAlike(SA) means that any derivative works have to be licensed under the same license as the original.
 * These are Creative Commons licenses. The different version numbers aren't too significant (you can check to see exactly what the differences are if you like). ShareAlike(SA) means that any derivative works have to be licensed under the same license as the original.
 * These are Creative Commons licenses. The different version numbers aren't too significant (you can check to see exactly what the differences are if you like). ShareAlike(SA) means that any derivative works have to be licensed under the same license as the original.
 * These are Creative Commons licenses. The different version numbers aren't too significant (you can check to see exactly what the differences are if you like). ShareAlike(SA) means that any derivative works have to be licensed under the same license as the original.


 * Wikipedia article on Creative Commons
 * Why you may choose to use this license: This license makes it easier to reuse your work, because it allows the users to link to a copy of the license rather than include a copy of the license in the redistribution. Using this license also allows your work to be combined with other works that are released under the same Creative Commons license; many wikis use Creative Commons licenses.


 * The Free Art License isn't very common, but it is an acceptable license for images here. It is a license that requires Attribution, and ShareAlike, called "copyleft" in this license(derivative works have to be licensed under the same license as the original)
 * The Free Art License isn't very common, but it is an acceptable license for images here. It is a license that requires Attribution, and ShareAlike, called "copyleft" in this license(derivative works have to be licensed under the same license as the original)


 * Wikipedia article on Free Art License
 * Why you may choose to use this license: This license makes it easier to reuse your work, because it allows the users to link to a copy of the license rather than include a copy of the license in the redistribution.


 * The GFDL is the license all the text in WikiFur is under. It wasn't really designed for images, although it can be used for them. It is a license that requires Attribution, and ShareAlike, called "copyleft" in this license(derivative works have to be licensed under the same as the original).
 * The GFDL is the license all the text in WikiFur is under. It wasn't really designed for images, although it can be used for them. It is a license that requires Attribution, and ShareAlike, called "copyleft" in this license(derivative works have to be licensed under the same as the original).


 * Wikipedia article on GFDL
 * Why you may choose to use this license: The text of WikiFur and many other wikis uses this license; licensing your images under the GFDL allows reusing the text and images under a single license. This license requires a copy of the GFDL(a multiple page document) to be included with any distribution, with no exceptions. If you license your work under GFDL only, it may restrict the kinds of work your image may be used in, just for practical reasons. For example, would you use an image in an advertisement if using it meant you had to include a five-page license document along with each copy of the advertisement? An artist may consider this an advantage if they want to restrict use of their work to uses that can devote the space to detailing the terms of the license.


 * The GPL and LGPL licenses were designed for software. They weren't really designed for images, although they can be used for images. This license requires a copy of the GPL(a multiple page document) to be included with any distribution, with no exceptions. They are licenses that requires Attribution, and ShareAlike, called "copyleft" in this license(derivative works have to be licensed under the same as the original)
 * The GPL and LGPL licenses were designed for software. They weren't really designed for images, although they can be used for images. This license requires a copy of the GPL(a multiple page document) to be included with any distribution, with no exceptions. They are licenses that requires Attribution, and ShareAlike, called "copyleft" in this license(derivative works have to be licensed under the same as the original)
 * The GPL and LGPL licenses were designed for software. They weren't really designed for images, although they can be used for images. This license requires a copy of the GPL(a multiple page document) to be included with any distribution, with no exceptions. They are licenses that requires Attribution, and ShareAlike, called "copyleft" in this license(derivative works have to be licensed under the same as the original)


 * Wikipedia article on GPL
 * Why you may choose to use this license: The most likely use is if you want to allow your image to be used in free software licensed under the GPL or LGPL. In that case you should multilicense with this license and another license more suitable for images. This license requires a copy of the GPL or LGPL(a multiple page document) to be included with any distribution, with no exceptions. If you license your work under GPL only, it may restrict the kinds of work your image may be used in, just for practical reasons. For example, would you use an image in an advertisement if using it meant you had to include a five-page license document along with each copy of the advertisement? An artist may consider this an advantage if they want to restrict use of their work to uses that can devote the space to detailing the terms of the license.


 * These are for multi-licensing. If you use it, you are allowing reuse as long as they follow either license mentioned in the tag. If you want to multilicense using a different combination, just put both tags, for example, to allow use under either GFDL or Free Art License, use  . There is no limit either; you could license your work       if you wanted(if you use the  or  you may be giving up the rights that allow you to enforce the other licenses on that image). Note that the licenses are not combined, nor do users have to follow ALL the licenses; as long as they follow at least one of the licenses, they are in compliance. You can also license your work under a small number of licenses and increase it later. The only caveat is that the licenses we use can't be retracted.
 * Why you may choose to use this license: Many uploaders choose to multilicense with the GFDL(which requires the five-page GFDL be included in redistribution) and another license that doesn't require including the whole license with redistribution(usually Creative Commons). Multilicensing under more licenses allow the work to be used with more wikis and other creative works that may be under a lesser-known license.
 * These are for multi-licensing. If you use it, you are allowing reuse as long as they follow either license mentioned in the tag. If you want to multilicense using a different combination, just put both tags, for example, to allow use under either GFDL or Free Art License, use  . There is no limit either; you could license your work       if you wanted(if you use the  or  you may be giving up the rights that allow you to enforce the other licenses on that image). Note that the licenses are not combined, nor do users have to follow ALL the licenses; as long as they follow at least one of the licenses, they are in compliance. You can also license your work under a small number of licenses and increase it later. The only caveat is that the licenses we use can't be retracted.
 * Why you may choose to use this license: Many uploaders choose to multilicense with the GFDL(which requires the five-page GFDL be included in redistribution) and another license that doesn't require including the whole license with redistribution(usually Creative Commons). Multilicensing under more licenses allow the work to be used with more wikis and other creative works that may be under a lesser-known license.
 * Why you may choose to use this license: Many uploaders choose to multilicense with the GFDL(which requires the five-page GFDL be included in redistribution) and another license that doesn't require including the whole license with redistribution(usually Creative Commons). Multilicensing under more licenses allow the work to be used with more wikis and other creative works that may be under a lesser-known license.

It is already free for anyone to use
Simply put, since copyright is granted automatically, most images on the net are not free to use. We have to assume not free until proven free.

Public domain
There are a few types of public domain images:
 * Old images. The exact time will vary from area to area; death of the author plus 70 years should be okay, plus 100 years is probably better
 * No creativity. Only creative works can be copyrighted. If the image shows no creativity at all, it may be public domain.
 * Any work of the United States Federal government is public domain, under the terms of Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code.

Make sure you explain why you believe the image is public domain. Use to tag them.
 * Wikipedia Help page explaining public domain - Note that not all Wikipedia policies are rules here.

Already under a free license
Already under a license we can use? Great, just link to or explain the license and use one of our tags if you can. If the license requires the creator to be attributed, put that on the image page.

Fair use
Fair use is an exception in the copyright laws that allows copyrighted material to be distributed without permission from the copyright holder. The criteria that are usually considered is:
 * Amount of the work taken. Choose low-resolution images and limit the number of images you take
 * Whether copying the work would affect the ability of the creator to profit from the work.
 * Whether a freely-licensed replacement could be found or made.


 * When an article is reporting on a particular artist or style of art, this tag may be used on example images.
 * When an article is reporting on a particular artist or style of art, this tag may be used on example images.


 * For the image buttons some websites provide for users to link back to the website with. You can put a link back to the site you got the button from like this:
 * For the image buttons some websites provide for users to link back to the website with. You can put a link back to the site you got the button from like this:


 * A panel or series of panels from a comic
 * A panel or series of panels from a comic


 * The cover of a work.
 * The cover of a work.


 * Fair use not covered by one of the other categories. It is recommended to write a fair use rationale when you use this.
 * Fair use not covered by one of the other categories. It is recommended to write a fair use rationale when you use this.


 * A fursona or character (drawings, not photographs)
 * A fursona or character (drawings, not photographs)


 * A logo.
 * A logo.


 * A mugshot. Some authorities release their mugshots into the public domain; you may use the tag if you know that to be the case.
 * A mugshot. Some authorities release their mugshots into the public domain; you may use the tag if you know that to be the case.


 * As explained in the photographs section above, a photograph of a three-dimensional work has at least two copyright holders, the photographer, and the creator(s) of the three-dimensional work. If the photographer releases the rights to the photo, but the creator(s) of the three-dimensional work do not, it may be necessary to use the image in fair use contexts only (for example, commentary on the work or its creator, or to document an event where the work was present). This template can use the name of the photographer, for instance
 * As explained in the photographs section above, a photograph of a three-dimensional work has at least two copyright holders, the photographer, and the creator(s) of the three-dimensional work. If the photographer releases the rights to the photo, but the creator(s) of the three-dimensional work do not, it may be necessary to use the image in fair use contexts only (for example, commentary on the work or its creator, or to document an event where the work was present). This template can use the name of the photographer, for instance


 * A press pack image. Something still copyrighted, but released to the media for wide distribution. It may also be used for something intended to be widely copied and distributed within the fandom. Be careful though; not every image that is published in the media is a press-pack image. Even if you know it to be a press-pack image, its creator may feel its proper use is for media outlets only, and not a fan site like WikiFur. If the image is important to the article, and a freely-licensed image can't be used instead, you may wish to send an e-mail to the copyright holder(see below).
 * A press pack image. Something still copyrighted, but released to the media for wide distribution. It may also be used for something intended to be widely copied and distributed within the fandom. Be careful though; not every image that is published in the media is a press-pack image. Even if you know it to be a press-pack image, its creator may feel its proper use is for media outlets only, and not a fan site like WikiFur. If the image is important to the article, and a freely-licensed image can't be used instead, you may wish to send an e-mail to the copyright holder(see below).


 * A screenshot(image captured from a video display) or an animated(like an animated GIF file) screenshot. Just about any image could be captured with a screenshot; that isn't the intended use though. It's for informing readers about the specific film, website, or computer program depicted in the screenshot.
 * A screenshot(image captured from a video display) or an animated(like an animated GIF file) screenshot. Just about any image could be captured with a screenshot; that isn't the intended use though. It's for informing readers about the specific film, website, or computer program depicted in the screenshot.
 * A screenshot(image captured from a video display) or an animated(like an animated GIF file) screenshot. Just about any image could be captured with a screenshot; that isn't the intended use though. It's for informing readers about the specific film, website, or computer program depicted in the screenshot.


 * Fair use images used in WikiFur news.
 * Fair use images used in WikiFur news.

None apply
If none of the above apply, we don't want the image(or more likely, we do, but it's not within the goals of our project to just take images). First recheck the fair use categories to see if any apply; if none of the existing fair use categories apply, but you still believe it's fair use, use along with a rationale.

Finding a different image
Does WikiFur already have an free image of what you're looking for? Does WikiMedia Commons? Does flickr(make sure you check all three boxes for Creative Commons under advanced search)?

Getting permission
The last thing to try before giving up is asking for the image to be released. Find the copyright holder and send them an e-mail (or even a letter).
 * If the holder that you're asking is someone outside the fandom, they may not be aware of WikiFur. You may want to ask for the image on behalf of Wikipedia instead. They have a system for archiving successful requests for free licenses. If your request on behalf of Wikipedia is successful, keep up your end or the agreement and upload it to Wikipedia and use it in a Wikipedia article. After that, since a freely-licensed image is usable not just on Wikipedia, you can copy it to WikiFur.
 * If the copyright-holder is someone inside the fandom, you may have better luck asking on behalf of WikiFur. Try to ask for a freely-licensed image rather than "permission to use on WikiFur"