• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

This file would not appear to fall into either of the classes above, or I'm not certain what its status is. This can be a copyrighted work whose use doesn't fall into any of the lessons above. By utilizing this site, you conform to the Phrases of Use and Privateness Coverage. The picture was created and https://www.vapetell.com/moreish-puff-brewed-hazelnut-vienna-0mg-50ml-short-fill-e-liquid printed by the same author who also holds the rights to the unique object, https://www.vapepossible.com/mccree-e-liquid-–-original-tobacco-–-2x60ml-6mg and no various depiction may very well be suitably created. The web site must explicitly say that the picture is released under a license that enables free re-use for any goal, e.g.

the Inventive Commons Attribution license. For topics who lived in the early-to-mid 20th century: Https%3A%2Folv.E.L.U.Pc@Haedongacademy.org have you thought-about if there is likely to be an older photograph that has fallen in the general public area? It is a historical photograph or other depiction of a person who is no longer alive. It is a historical portrait of a person no longer alive. Will probably be used as the primary technique of visual identification of that particular person within the article about them.

This part shouldn't be for pictures used merely as an instance an article about an individual or thing, exhibiting what that particular person or factor https://www.vapepossible.com/mob-liquid-–-luciano-–-60ml-0mg appear like. Please search for the copyright rules for the specific nation in question. Its copyright expired for another reason. For https://www.vapetell.com/five-star-choice-prestige-0mg-100ml-short-fill-e-liquid a file to be deemed replaceable, it is not crucial that a suitable replacement already exists. There is not going to be more non-free materials used than vital.

People can be joyful to help you at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Use this provided that there may be an express licensing statement in the supply. If the supply website would not say so explicitly, please do not upload the file. If you happen to plan to make use of the file for any purpose aside from this, please do not use this part, however the one labelled "different sort of non-free work" under. Your rationalization should make it clear why the article can be considerably worse off without this file.

We actually take these copyright rules very severely on Wikipedia. I have read the Wikipedia guidelines on Non-Free Content, and I'm ready to elucidate how the use of this file will meet the criteria set out there. Keep in mind that the use of non-free recordsdata have to be minimal. Such recordsdata normally cannot be used even underneath the "Fair Use" guidelines, besides in uncommon cases. Most images on the web are under copyright and belong to anyone, even in case you consider the owner will not care about that copyright.

It is just too simple to be eligible for copyright. It might apply to some very simple logos that don't include advanced pictorial elements. This typically applies only to graphics that consist solely of straightforward geometric shapes and/or https://www.vapetell.com/innokin-endura-t18e-kit [sneak a peek at this website] just a few letters or words, or to gadgets equivalent to mathematical or chemical formulae. If the nation does not have an exemption rule that applies to this item, go on with the part for "non-free copyrighted works" under.

It never applies to images! The article incorporates a discussion of that work which requires illustration. Please explain why this function couldn't be served with an alternate, free illustration that might yet be found or created.