File talk:PeterBethune with Earthrace.JPG

It looks like your concerns have been addressed. If not, let us know what we need to do. Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:42, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The image is fully replaceable as it is of a living person and the page does not say copyright free anywhere on it. Just email the people has I have told you a dozen times and be done with it.--Terrillja _talk 15:44, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It DOES say that. Please use the link I have provided, and the description of the location provided. I have cut and pasted the text from their web page EXACTLY as it appears. Go look. Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This one: This statement appears here: http://www.earthrace.net/index.php?section=2 in the "News and Media" section. If you click on that link, it takes you to the photos. The photo in question is one of those photos. 15:58, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

This statement appears here: http://www.earthrace.net/index.php?section=2 in the "News and Media" section. (towards the bottom of the page) Ghostofnemo (talk) 16:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From Ghostofnemo's talk page: Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to File:PeterBethune with Earthrace.JPG. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. No where on the page does it say that the images are copyright free. Continuing to state so is considered disruption. Terrillja _talk 15:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the source - I've given a link and a description of the location. I am quoting the source EXACTLY. Please take a look. Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:51, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did a search on the photos page and the page with the letter, neither one has anything about copy right or copyright. Have another link? --Terrillja _talk 15:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try the link in the Fair Use Rational that you are editing? Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:55, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This one: This statement appears here: http://www.earthrace.net/index.php?section=2 in the "News and Media" section. Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:56, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you click on that link, it takes you to the photos. The photo in question is one of those photos. Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:56, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The one with the email/letter that starts with "Good on Ya, Pete Bethune", yes, I did. No mention of copyright.--Terrillja _talk 15:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This statement appears here: http://www.earthrace.net/index.php?section=2 in the "News and Media" section. (towards the bottom of the page) Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only shows up when you use a browser which does not follow web standards. Well built site.--Terrillja _talk 16:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know. I can't see Bethune's photo on his profile either. Ghostofnemo (talk) 16:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing[edit]

This image was originally uploaded to Wikipedia on 11 April 2010. As evidenced by the discussion above, in which I took no part, the the source page read "Hi Res Imagery (copy right free archive of hi resolution digital photos)" and the license for this image read "The following images may be used by media, individuals, schools and other organisations free-of-charge." The image was subsequently uploaded to commons and the image here was deleted. In January 2011 the image was deleted from commons and this image was restored.

Sometime after the image was uploaded to commons, Earthrace reworked its site and moved many images to a blog. This image was not amongst them and is no longer available at the source page, where the licence has changed. However, this is not of consequence, as the license at the time of upload confirmed taht the image was free for use. For this reason I'm going to remove the tag on the article, with a note in the licensing section. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

However it did not say free for use forever, so the licencer can change their mind and withdraw that permission, they may or may not have done that. Also it is not clear that derivatives have been permitted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]