File talk:Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

To me there seems to be a vested interest for the importer to also verify an image, especially where the underlying image has third party design elements that may be considered to override a potentially dubious claim of copyright.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:16, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to the application icons? My understanding is that these are considered incidental (because they aren't the photograph's primary subject). To my knowledge, a problem arises when an image is used as an excuse to illustrate a non-free element (e.g. a "free" photograph of a child holding a Mickey Mouse doll used to illustrate the non-free Mickey Mouse character).
When seeking a free Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 photograph, I rejected several of higher quality on the basis that they depicted tablets running specific copyrighted applications (which therefore could be considered primary subjects). For example, this image illustrates both the tablet and the "Angry Birds Rio" game.
If I'm mistaken, the problem is widespread; Commons hosts numerous photographs of this nature (used to illustrate similar products across various Wikimedia projects). —David Levy 17:37/19:02, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I changed the copyvio to a regular DR at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1.jpg for further discussion. Wknight94 talk 10:12, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]