File talk:CellMembraneDrawing.jpg

Copied from en:Image talk:CellMembraneDrawing.jpg which is the same image:

This picture is copyright protected. Although it is stated that is taken from a gouvernment source, the picture is originally from an Article in Scientific American (1985), drawn by Dana Burns:

Bretscher M.S. The molecules of the cell membrane. Scientific American, 1985, 253(4), 100-108

If you just take a picture from a website you cannot assume that the owner of website holds the copyright for all the pictures he uses.

---

Well, what do we say about that? / Habj 03:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Deletion request, December 29, 2005

Excellent drawing for a cell biology article. It's from a 1985 issue of Scientific American and later found its way to a US government website. Deleted from English Wikipedia, see Image talk:CellMembraneDrawing.jpg and en:Image talk:CellMembraneDrawing.jpg. Thuresson 08:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

The original source, linked at Image:CellMembraneDrawing.jpg, does not say the image is non-free. Is there any proof the image is non-free? I'll vote keep until confirmed the image was not created by a U.S government emplyee in their duty. Someone would need to check the article in Scientific American (1985), claimed to be drawn by Dana Burns:

Bretscher M.S. The molecules of the cell membrane. Scientific American, 1985, 253(4), 100-108 ".

Otherwise, I think we should trust The NIST Center for Neutron Research, and avoid further copyright paranoia. / Fred Chess 17:22, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

At a closer look, the reason for deletion from enwiki probably was that the image can be found on commons - it is still used in the article en:Cell membrane. / --Habj 10:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Can someone find the note at the NIST web page, that says that all images are PD except images labelled as copyrighted? I have tried, but failed. / --Habj 10:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

The information on the image descrption page is accurate. you can read it on [1]. / Fred Chess 05:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

• I'll try and find time to check this in a hardcopy, though I suspect that it is indeed non-free. I don't think it is "copyright paranoia" to nominate something for deletion which is clearly scanned in if someone is willing to provide a fairly strong reason to think it is non-free, but anyway, I'll try to find time to look it up next week. --Fastfission 20:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I've checked the magazine, and I see the problem as nearly solved. The article is on pages 86-90, not 100-188; the rest of the information is correct. The list of illustrations on page 5 in the magazine mentiones Dana Burst as the source of images on page 88 - 90. Dana Burst might have be been a NIST employee when she made this drawing, or not - we don't know. The note on the NIST page does not state that the material on the site is not copyrighted; it says With the exception of material marked as copyrighted, information presented on these pages is considered public information and may be distributed or copied. Use of appropriate byline/photo/image credits is requested.

Alas, do we have a "copyrightedfreeuse"-like template that says that the image should be credited? If not, I think we should make one. // Habj 13:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I changed the PD tag to "Copyrighted free use provided that|appropriate credit is given". // Habj 19:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)