User talk:Guise/Archive 1
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
File:Galadriel by Michael C Hayes.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
Kleuske (talk) 11:10, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
File tagging File:Eowyn vs the Nazgul by CarmenSinek.jpg
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Eowyn vs the Nazgul by CarmenSinek.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.
Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Eowyn vs the Nazgul by CarmenSinek.jpg]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Túrelio (talk) 08:55, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
File:Frodo by Mark Ferrari.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Mlpearc (open channel) 15:58, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
File:Lupin01.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
— Racconish ☎ 10:44, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
File:August Derleth.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Permission mail sent by the author
Hello! Je pense qu'au lieu d'utiliser "Permission mail sent by the author (Ticket# xxxxxxxxxxxx)", tu pourrais passer au template:OR. Je pense que les même les non membres OTRS peuvent l'introduire et ça rend plus facile le traitement après. Vois comment il s'utilise (il faut le subst-er). LA raison à insérer est dans tous les cas "pending". Merci --Ruthven (msg) 07:35, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
File:René Belin.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:34, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Meurisse
Bonjour, Au sujet de File:Léon Blum 1925.jpg, c'est une bonne idée d'avoir enlevé le modèle PD-old, qui avait été placé par le téléverseur d'origine et qui ne convenait pas, puisque le photographe est inconnu. Mais le modèle PD-author ne semble pas convenir non plus puisque, sauf erreur, l'agence Meurisse n'a pas fait de déclaration disant placer volontairement cette photographie universellement dans le domaine public. Plus probablement, la photographie est, de fait, dans le domaine public en France, soit parce qu'elle y était soumise à des droits d'auteur et que les droits d'auteur patrimoniaux ont expiré étant donné le nombre d'années depuis la publication, soit parce que par sa nature elle n'y était pas soumise à des droits d'auteur (selon l'école de pensée à laquelle on veut se rattacher). La seconde hypothèse étant difficile d'application sur Wikimedia Commons, en pratique on y retient en général la première. Il s'agit alors d'utiliser des modèles qui expriment cette situation, ce qui peut se faire en utilisant par exemple les deux modèles PD-anon-70-EU et PD-1996. Le premier exprime l'idée que les droits d'auteur patrimoniaux ont expiré en France. Le second exprime l'idée qu'une oeuvre, bien que publiée après 1922, n'a pas acquis de droits d'auteur aux États-Unis. Voir par exemple File:Alexander Alekhine, Edgard Colle, 1925.jpg. C'est probablement la meilleure solution pour ces cas. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:38, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
- Merci beaucoup pour ces explications et ces conseils, Asclepias ! Je viens de modifier les modèles de File:Léon Blum 1925.jpg en conséquence.
- N'hésite pas à me donner également ton avis pour les différents fichiers similaires à File:René Belin.jpg, à savoir les photographies parues dans les journaux L'Ouest-Éclair ou Paris-Soir, que j'ai uploadées à partir de Gallica (File:Paul Baudoin.jpg, File:Henry Lémery - 1940.jpg, File:Henri de Rothschild.jpg, etc.).
- Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 23:03, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
- Je pensais peut-être ajouter quelque chose dans la discussion au sujet de File:René Belin.jpg, mais ces photographies présentent plusieurs problèmes, parce que le journal n'en mentionne pas l'origine et parce qu'elles ne sont probablement pas libres aux États-Unis. Même si on supposait que leur publication dans ce journal était leur publication d'origine et que leurs auteurs sont inconnus, et qu'on utilise le modèle PD-anon-70-EU pour leur statut en France, des oeuvres anonymes publiées en France après 1936 ne peuvent pas se prévaloir du modèle PD-1996 pour leur statut aux États-Unis (voir là pour les détails du calcul). Il faudrait utiliser le modèle Not-PD-US-URAA. Même si elles sont conservées, leur statut sur Commons reste incertain. -- Asclepias (talk) 00:23, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
File:René Goguey et Michel Reddé.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
--CptKeyes (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
File:Michel Reddé sur le site des fouilles archéologiques du siège d'Alésia.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
--CptKeyes (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
File:Michel Reddé site des fouilles archéologiques du siège d'Alésia.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
--CptKeyes (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
File:Michel Reddé - site des fouilles archéologiques du siège d'Alésia.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
--CptKeyes (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
File:Michel Reddé - fin du chantier des fouilles archéologiques du siège d'Alésia - 1997.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
--CptKeyes (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
File:Michel Reddé site des fouilles archéologiques du siège d'Alésia.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
--CptKeyes (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
File:JeanIIdeBourbonFouquet1470.jpg
Hi Guise, when you upload new file versions from a different source, never remove the source info for the old file version(s), only update, if you notice a changed link. For JeanIIdeBourbonFouquet1470.jpg I just have fixed this. — Speravir – 00:20, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Image without license
File:Bussy d'Amboise - vers 1578.jpg
This message was added automatically by MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 18:36, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
File:Jeannette Vermeersch.jpg
This message was added automatically by MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 22:08, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
File:Marie-Claude Vaillant-Couturier.jpg
This message was added automatically by MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner), if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 22:14, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Batch uploading/Fonds Ancely/notes/Ingestion
Bonjour,
Ce modèle s’applique à tous les fichiers du fonds − y ajouter une description c’est coder en dur la même description pour tous les fichiers :)
(Ce modèle n’était initialement destiné qu’à simplifier l’import des fichiers, et pas à perdurer − Il faudrait que je subst: le modèle sur toutes ses utilisations…)
Cdlt, Jean-Fred (talk) 10:32, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Pas de problème, Jean-Fred. Merci de l'info ! :-) Cordialement. --Guise (talk) 10:33, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
File:Marcel Paul ministre.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Jcb (talk) 21:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
File:SDCC 2018 - Black Manta Statue.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
廣九直通車 (talk) 03:46, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Cropping images
By way of information for the future, when you want to crop an image, as you did with File:Elektra Dragon Con 2007 - cropped.jpg, I suggest you use the CropTool that can be activated in your commons Preferences, under Gadgets. The CropTool will then appears in the left side of your screen. It saves everyone a lot of time because it transfers all the correct and appropriate information into the cropped image, such as source, license, author, etc. It even leaves a backlink to the original and visa versa so long as the original has been positively reviewed. That way all the proper information is there and does not need to be manually reviewed by volunteers. If you are just cropping a small bit of the image like a frame you can decide to overwrite the original image but for more major crops you should upload the cropped version as a separate new image, but you have a choice. I hope you can see how everyone can save time and frustration by using CropTool. BTW you must also use the same licence as the original and not change it as you wish like because the copyright belong to the copyright holder and not to you, so they decide the type of licence. Good luck. Ww2censor (talk) 14:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for these informations, Ww2censor ! Regards. --Guise (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
File:Pierre Caziot.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Finnusertop (talk) 18:39, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
File:Forces occultes.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.
|
Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:47, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Bonjour. Suite à votre message, j'ai également pensé de prime abord que le copyright revendiqué par la Grande loge de France était abusif ; il se trouve cependant que la BnF reprend la même information. Il faudrait également creuser pour voir si cette affiche de 1943 est vraiment anonyme. Cordialement, --Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:06, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Patrick Rogel, je viens de vérifier sur le site de la Bibliothèque historique de la Ville de Paris, qui confirme l'anonymat de l'auteur (J.J.S. (19..-) [Illustrateur]) en sus du fait que les droits sont tombés dans le domaine public [1]. Je pense que ça tombe pile-poil dans PD-EU-Anonymous et PD-1996 ! :-)
- Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 21:13, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Et bien je crois que nous avons chacun deux informations contradictoires. Comme je le disais, il va faloir creuser. De toutes manières, un adminstrateur va se pencher dessus. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:18, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Pas de souci, attendons l'avis d'un admin. Cela dit, indépendamment de ce fichier image, je serais curieux de connaître de précédents cas de copyrights abusifs ayant fait l'objet de débats sur Wikimedia Commons. --Guise (talk) 21:23, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Je crois qu'il va faloir que vous en passiez par la Grande logo pour avoir des informations et leur demandiez s'ils souhaitent libérer cette image sous license Creative Commons. PS : attention à ne pas confondre auteur inconnu et auteur anonyme ; ici l'auteur est connu puisqu'il s'agit de "J.J.S."; peut être a-t-il survécu à la Libération et est décédé plus tard, auquel cas son oeuvre n'est toujours pas dans le domaine public (puisque post mortem auctoris + 70 ans), mais ce ne sont que des supputations. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Patrick Rogel, cela signifie-t-il que PD-EU-Anonymous ne s'applique pas dans le cas de "J.J.S." ? Après vérification, aucun ouvrage (étude historique ou étude sur le cinéma) ne révèle son identité.
- Par ailleurs, j'avoue ne pas comprendre sur quelle base il nous faudrait prendre en compte le copyright revendiqué par la Grande loge de France plutôt que la mention avancée par la Bibliothèque historique de la Ville de Paris. Comment la Grande Loge peut imposer un copyright sur l'affiche d'un film antimaçonnique réalisé sous l'Occupation, poster dessiné par un inconnu de surcroît ? A contrario de la BHVP qui, disposant d'un autre exemplaire dans ses collections, se contente d'appliquer le droit en énonçant que cela appartient au domaine public ? En somme, ne suffirait-il pas de télécharger l'image à partir du site de la BHVP afin d'éviter tout problème ? Désolé, ça fait beaucoup de questions... Cordialement. --Guise (talk) 14:26, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Par ailleurs, Patrick Rogel, la BnF ne reprend pas ici la même information relative au copyright puisque rien n'indique "droits réservés". En effet, la BnF se contente d'indiquer la collection d'où provient l'exemplaire reproduit dans le catalogue de l'exposition. --Guise (talk) 21:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Je crois qu'il va faloir que vous en passiez par la Grande logo pour avoir des informations et leur demandiez s'ils souhaitent libérer cette image sous license Creative Commons. PS : attention à ne pas confondre auteur inconnu et auteur anonyme ; ici l'auteur est connu puisqu'il s'agit de "J.J.S."; peut être a-t-il survécu à la Libération et est décédé plus tard, auquel cas son oeuvre n'est toujours pas dans le domaine public (puisque post mortem auctoris + 70 ans), mais ce ne sont que des supputations. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Pas de souci, attendons l'avis d'un admin. Cela dit, indépendamment de ce fichier image, je serais curieux de connaître de précédents cas de copyrights abusifs ayant fait l'objet de débats sur Wikimedia Commons. --Guise (talk) 21:23, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Et bien je crois que nous avons chacun deux informations contradictoires. Comme je le disais, il va faloir creuser. De toutes manières, un adminstrateur va se pencher dessus. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:18, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
File:Forces occultes.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Ronhjones (Talk) 15:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
File:Ils donnent leur sang. Donnez votre travail pour sauver l'Europe du Bolchévisme - affiche.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:34, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Une nouvelle fois, informations contradictoires. Merci de faire une recherche ou de poser une question au Bistro AVANT de téléverser. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Patrick Rogel, les droits revendiqués par fotostock correspondent à la photographie de l'affiche prise par J.D. Dallet le 17 février 2015 [2]. Autrement dit, pas à l'oeuvre originale dont la BHVP conserve un autre exemplaire, clairement affiché comme entré dans le domaine public. Le "copyfraud" apparaît évident.
- Cela dit, vous avez raison sur un point : il convient d'éclaircir préalablement cette histoire de droits en sollicitant les autres contributeurs sur le forum de Wikimedia Commons ainsi que sur Legifer de Wikipedia. --Guise (talk) 20:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)