File talk:Matisyahu - Youth.jpg

Source[edit]

Per WP:FUC criterion 10a this image needs: "Proper attribution of the source of the material, and attribution of the copyright holder if different from the source"

Who is the copyright holder and why are they not getting attribution? ^(H) 23:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. The source isn't the web site the cover was copied from, nor is it "my scanner", the source is the publisher of the album. Addhoc 00:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell is going on here? It doesn't make any difference which web site this was downloaded from, the copyright holder is the same. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 00:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Addhoc for finding the copyright holder. ^(H) 00:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If "source" is the copyright holder, then why are uploaders supposed to give it? Also, isn't this image considerably too big and high-quality for the fair-use conditions? --Mel Etitis (Talk) 18:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Providing source information is a courtesy. It helps others verify the authenticity of the image and confirm the copyright status. The assertion that this image is too high-quality to satisfy Wikipedia policy is not necessarily correct. Online retailers and reviewers use album covers for the same reason, and in compliance with the same fair use limitations, as Wikipedia. There is no hard-coded limit on the resolution of fair use images and 500px rez is still far below any reasonable requirement for high-quality commercial use. That said, some editors go by an unwritten guideline to limit all fair use images to 300px horizontal rez. The effort required to downsample this image is trivial, so this concern is easy to address. The greater issue is, why waste time arguing over one reasonably-sourced album cover when there are thousands of completely unjustified, possibly fake images uploaded under the same tag? A standardization of the upload and verification process might limit such debates. The copyright to almost all album cover art is owned either by the record company, musician, or illustrator, and the fair use rationale for all album covers is nearly identical. Lets try to set up a review system whereby editors are instructed to find a duplicate of the cover from a reliable source (e.g. Amazon) and append a pre-selected rationale based on current image use. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 08:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue about a reliable source is surely precisely why up-loaders are required to give one (not merely to make a gesture at the (assumed) copy-right holder). The reason for my spending more time on it than it deserves is that I was faced with a somewhat aggressive response to my standard application of the "no-source" tag.

I broadly agree with your suggestion about the desirability for a standardised system. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 13:06, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]