Board games are usually of copyright design, and photographs that are intended to illustrate the game board and/or the box are not normally acceptable. Photographs of a game in progress may possibly be allowable provided that the copyright elements are incidental and de minimis to the overall image, but that is unlikely to be the case if the whole board or box design is clearly shown. The design shown does not automatically become incidental simply because there are some players in the frame along with the board.

OK Exceptions: Old board games such as backgammon, chess and go are allowable unless the board incorporates some original artistic design. Monopoly is also a special case: the 'original' Monopoly board is now out of copyright - it was published in a US patent application back in 1935: see w:Image:DarrowPage1.png. Modern standard sets may be shown provided that they are substantially identical in design to the original. Sets with significant new design elements, such as Monopoly Junior, are not allowed since the new design elements will be entitled to a new copyright.

•  Not OK General rule.
• OK Exceptions: Old books and very simple design: File:Thilo Sarrazin - Deutschland schafft sich ab. Cover.svg; Published without a copyright notice on the dust jacket.
• OK Exceptions: Book covers illustrated only with public domain work: File:Angelika Kauffmann- Bildnismalerei im 18. Jahrhundert book cover.gif

Book covers, unless they are very old (see Commons:ライセンシング: Material in the public domain), usually carry copyright-protected designs, and photographs of them may not normally be uploaded to Commons. The fact that you are the physical owner of a book does not mean that you are authorised to replicate the cover design by uploading a copy here. A rare exception to this rule would be a book cover which is simple enough to not exceed the Threshold of originality. Another exception is if the book carried a dust jacket between 1930 and 1977 and the dust jacket did not have a copyright notice, or from 1977 to 1989 if there was no notice and no copyright registration; {{PD-US-dust-jacket}}. A front cover attached to the book without a dust jacket may also require it's own copyright notice or registration within these years.

Photographs of buildings are normally allowed if the building is old enough to be public domain (in many countries, where the architect has been dead for at least 70 years). Photographs of more recent buildings may be restricted because of the architect's copyright, though some countries have exceptions that allow photographs to be taken of any building in a public place. See Commons:風景の自由. Buildings constructed before December 1, 1990, are not protected by copyright in the United States.

• See Album covers.

You should assume that a coat of arms drawn by someone else is copyright-protected unless you can demonstrate to the contrary. Even if the elements making up the arms have been used for hundreds of years, each specific realization may have sufficient originality to attract copyright protection. Direct copies of such specific realizations cannot therefore be uploaded even if you have taken the trouble to trace or even re-draw the design yourself.

However, if you can establish that the specific realization you want to use is old enough to be out of copyright, it is OK to upload. It is also OK if you can establish that the specific realization differs from an old public domain realization only by immaterial details that in themselves are not sufficiently creative to generate a new copyright.

See also Commons:Coats of arms and Copyright on emblems.

For a relevant legal discussion from a US perspective, see Wikilegal/Flags and logos from international organizations.

• See Commons:通貨 and Commons:PD-Art タグを適用する場合: Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet.

• As far as possible, upload each source image as a standalone image with suitable source and licensing information.
• Finally, upload the collage using the "derivative work of one or several files from Commons" option at Commons:Upload/ja
• Or you may add every source information manually: see File:Collage of Six Cats-01.jpg, for example.

 Not OK No photographs, drawings, paintings or any other copies/derivative works of these are allowed (as long as the original is not in the public domain or freely licensed). No pictures are allowed of items which are derivatives from copyrighted figures themselves, like dolls, action figures, T-shirts, printed bags, ashtrays etc.

OK Photographs you've taken yourself at concerts are believed to be acceptable. We believe such photos are not covered by the performing artists' related (neighbouring) rights (see this discussion). Nevertheless: ideally, you should be able to present an explicit permission by the performer to take and publish photos. Beware of concert photos showing an artistic stage design: such photos are not ok, as they may infringe the stage designer's copyright. Close-ups of performing artists should be fine, though. On the other hand, you should be aware that uploading concert photographs here may infringe terms which you agreed to when purchasing the ticket or as a condition of entry.

• See also: Practical tips on concert photography
• On concert photographs found on other web sites, see Commons:Problematic sources: Fan sites.

"This is a complex and difficult issue, which in the end comes down to the decision of individual contributors. Although we cannot offer legal advice in particular cases, we can provide these general thoughts. In short, both costumes and masks are copyrightable. Additionally, posting pictures of costumes or masks that are themselves under copyright, or which depict characters that are under copyright could qualify as copyright infringement (subject to a fair use analysis).

The 1991 policy decision on costumes and masks by the Copyright Office appears to still be in effect, and although it is only advisory, it is a good indication of where courts tend to fall on this issue. It says that masks are definitely copyrightable, and that costumes may be copyrightable in certain circumstances (or at least certain features of the costume might be copyrightable), subject to a complicated legal analysis to determine whether the aesthetic aspects of the costume are "separable" from the costume's role as an article of clothing (the utilitarian aspects). Some information on the separability test can be found at [link replaced with archived copy].

The separability test is an unfortunate example of where American law can get rather confusing, as the outcome may differ from court to court. However, the important thing for us to keep in mind is that if someone obtains a copyright for either the character that is being depicted by the costume, or obtains a copyright for the costume or mask itself, she could send us a DMCA takedown notice for any photograph of a costume or mask depicting that character (as it could be considered a derivative work), and the individual who posted the image could also be liable for copyright infringement. This is similar to the "Mickey Mouse action figure" example at Commons:二次的著作物, which demonstrates that reproducing a 3D copyrighted work in 2D (or vice-versa) is not sufficient to escape liability.

The separability test is legally complex, and because it is performed only once a matter goes to court, the outcome is uncertain. The same is also true of the “fair use” defense, which is often regarded as a dangerous and expensive defense to rely on. The safest approach is to assume that if a costume depicts a character that is under copyright, or if the costume itself is produced by a company that is likely to have placed it under copyright, posting photographs of it may result in a DMCA takedown notice, and possible liability to the individual who posted it.

• See Album covers and Book covers.

Photographs can be copyrighted. A drawing made from a copyrighted photograph is a derivative work; such a drawing can be published only if the copyright owner of the underlying photograph has given their express consent. The artist of the drawing also has a copyright on all aspects original to their drawing. If the base photo is in the public domain, there's only the copyright of the artist of the drawing to consider. If you want to upload a drawing made by someone else based on a copyrighted photo, you thus need both the photographer's and the artist's consent. If you yourself have made a drawing based on a copyrighted photo, you need the permission of the photographer before uploading your drawing here.

Drawings based on several photos are derivative works of all of them, and permission from the authors of all copyrighted photos would be needed. However, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:KGerstein.jpg: the drawing can be inspired by the photos or the photos used to get to know the likeness of the subject without the drawing being a derived work. The same also applies to paintings done after photographs, or drawings and paintings done based on other drawings or paintings, and even to drawings or paintings done directly after a 3D sculpture: all are derivative works, and in all cases the copyright of the underlying original needs to be considered. It also applies to collages. See also Art (copies of).

Engravings are original works and subject to copyright. If an engraving is done after a pre-existing work, the engraving is a derivative work. If so, one needs not only to account for the engraver's copyright but also for that of the creator of the underlying work. An engraver may get a copyright even if he produces an engraving of a public domain original. The choices made by an engraver of where exactly to place his engraved lines, how to space them, etc. are sufficient to make an engraving pass the threshold of originality. This also applies to etchings or woodcuts.

In the UK, engravings have been copyrighted since 1734, when the Engravings Copyright Act (8 Geo. 2 c. 13) was passed (amended in 1767 to also cover engravings done after pre-existing works). In the U.S., Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony (111 U.S. 53 (1884)) held that when the law said it applied to "maps, charts, and writings", the term "writings" subsumed "all forms of writing, printing, engraving, etching, &c. ...". Alfred Bell & Co. v. Catalda Fine Arts, Inc. (191 F.2d 99 (2d Cir. 1951)) upheld copyrights on mezzotint reproductions of paintings that were in the public domain.

Educationally-useful fan art can be accepted on Commons provided it has not been copied from any creative element of the original copyright work such as a movie, TV show, comic book or computer game. For more details, see Commons:ファンアート.

OK According to the Berne Convention, a work can be protected by copyright only when it is written or recorded on a fixed medium. Since a firework display in action is not so recorded it does not in itself attract protection, and such displays can be freely photographed (but not necessarily filmed). The photograph will attract protection as an original photographic work, with the copyright normally owned by the photographer. So, if you have taken such a photograph yourself, you can freely upload it.

OK General rule In most countries, such as Germany, works of folklore and traditional works are not covered by copyright as long as they do not exceed the threshold of originality.(citation needed)

 Not OK Exceptions: In some countries, such as Malawi, works of folklore are copyrighted by the government in perpetuity, and are thus never public domain.

OK In most cases, the presentation of food as such is not copyrightable. However consensus on Commons has generally found that artistic presentations, including food-based sculptures and cake decorations, despite their inherent impermanence, may be copyrighted if they are sufficiently original. (See, for example, Commons:Deletion requests/Images in Category:Butter sculptures.)

Unlike natural settings, which are not copyrightable because they lack human creativity, living gardens are sometimes copyrightable, depending on the jurisdiction. In some countries, such as the US, living gardens have been held uncopyrightable (), while in Germany they are copyrightable ().

Commons requires clear evidence of public domain status or a free license. ◯   Exceptions: Graffiti created in the U.S. before 1978 without a copyright notice may be in the public domain (use {{PD-US-no notice}}). Some countries allow photos of graffiti under freedom of panorama for 2D works, such as Germany and the Czech Republic. The US and certain bigger countries with sufficient freedom of panorama do not (for example, the United Kingdom, Mongolia, and Canada).

For commissioned or legally painted public art, see Murals.

Links to relevant discussions

• Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Non-free graffiti
• Statut juridique de l'art urbain en France

The vast majority of images found on the internet are copyright-protected and may not be uploaded. The fact that an image has been posted to a publicly-available website does not give you implied permission to re-use it nor to upload it here. Many websites are silent on copyright issues, but images on those sites are just as off-limits as those on sites which explicitly say "Copyright, all rights reserved". Works are copyrighted by default in most countries due to their agreement with the Berne Convention; a copyright notice or a © sign is not needed.

Some specific sites are listed at Public domain image resources, Problematic sources and Bad sources.

Jewelry designs are generally protected by copyright so long as they exhibit originality and creativity. However, since items of jewelry don't normally carry a copyright notice, any jewelry sold in the United States before 1989 is probably in the public domain.

• See, for example, R.F.M.A.S., Inc. v. Mimi So (2009), Donald Bruce & Co. v. B. H. Multi Com Corp. (1997), and Eyal R.D. Corp. v. Jewelex New York, Ltd. (2008).

You may not upload copies of copyrighted maps to Commons or trace or even redraw such a map yourself. Any map you create yourself must be wholly based on public domain sources or on sources that have been released under a suitable free license. Some maps are too simple to be copyrightable (not meeting Commons:独創性の水準). For more information on which maps are copyrighted, see Commons:二次的著作物: Maps.

Satellite pictures and derived maps from commercial projects like Google Earth, Google Maps, bing.com, and others are based on a combination of free and copyrighted satellite imagery and are, therefore, not acceptable on Commons.

Maps issued by the UK Ordnance Survey, Admiralty charts etc. are subject to Crown copyright. They enter the public domain 50 years after the initial publication (currently anything before 1976): for these old maps only use license tag {{OldOS}}. Some are also released under the Ordnance Survey OpenData license ({{OS OpenData}}) or the Open Government Licence ({{OGL}}).

[OK] On the other hand, maps and charts of the United States compiled by US Federal Government agencies are {{PD-USGov}}. Maps and charts of the rest of the world from Federal agencies may contain copyrighted data sets from other sources and not be PD. This is true of most NIMA/NGA marine charts.

[OK] Maps from free media repositories, such as those listed in the map section of "Commons:Free media resources" are generally OK, but must be used carefully and critically.

[OK] Maps from OpenStreetMap may be used, but usage must fulfil OpenStreetMap's attribution requirements.

In the United States, the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition says in section 924.3(D) that medical images (X-rays, CTs, MRIs etc.) are not eligible for copyright. Medical images which are created and published in the United States are in the public domain and if shared on Wikimedia Commons should use the {{PD-US-Medical imaging}} license. Beyond the United States there is less certainty, but medical x-ray images which fall under the threshold of originality in their country of origin and are ineligible for protection should use the {{PD-medical}} license.

For a legal discussion, see Copyright of X-Ray Images. In some countries, such as Germany or Sweden, medical images are protected with the related rights.

• See also Commons:Patient images.

 Not OK In the United States, model objects are considered to be "pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works" as defined by 17 U.S.C. 101.

• See User:Elcobbola/Models
• See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tango B-396 Model.JPG

In other parts of the world, the rules may differ.

For objects which were manufactured to be non-artistic and functional utilitarian articles, the information for utility objects is likely to apply. Nonfunctional replicas of objects (including replicas of non-artistic utilitarian articles) are likely copyrightable as models. Objects that are nonfunctional in real life (i.e. a "time-traveling machine" made up of electronic and mechanical parts) are also likely copyrightable as being non-utilitarian artistic works. See also COM:TOYS.

Unless old enough to be in the public domain, murals will normally be copyright-protected even if the artist is unknown. Thus, images of murals cannot usually be accepted. It normally makes no difference if the mural is in a public place and can be freely photographed since Freedom of Panorama, where it exists, typically does not extend to permitting photographs of 2D artworks such as murals. There are some exceptions - see: Freedom of Panorama.

• See also Graffiti

Musical works are generally subject to two different copyrights:

• The copyright of the composition.
• The copyright of the recording or performance of the composition.

Generally, almost all current music is copyrighted and may not be uploaded to Commons. In order to upload a piece of recorded music to Commons, both the composition and the recording must be freely-licensed or in the public domain. A specific recording of a song in the public domain can still be copyrighted, as the specific arrangement is considered a derivative work that is eligible for its own copyright, regardless of the copyright status of the original composition.

Most pre-1972 sound recordings created in the United States are not in the public domain. Under Title II of the Music Modernization Act, sound recordings first fixed prior to February 15, 1972 are protected under US federal copyright for a term that depends on when the recording was first published. (In particular, recordings that were first published prior to 1923 entered the public domain in the US on January 1, 2022.) Unlike other works, this federal copyright protection for pre-1972 recordings applies regardless of any formalities (copyright notice, registration, and/or renewal.) As such, US copyright templates like {{PD-US-expired}} do not apply to sound recordings.

• See also: Commons:ハートルのチャート#Sound recordings.

Even in countries with freedom-of-panorama exception (FoP), this exception does not generally extend to permitting photographs of 2D artworks or extended textual matter. For details see the 3rd and 4th color-code column in Commons:Freedom of panorama#Summary table.

Provided the noticeboard/sign is permanently located in a public place,

• 2D-artwork is included in the FoP copyright-exception in most FoP-countries, but not in:
   Not OK Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Brunei, Canada, China, Denmark, Fiji, Finland, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Japan, Malta, Moldova, Mongolia, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Pakistan, Palestine, Russia, Singapore, Sweden, Taiwan, USA and the UK.
  

OK Text is included in the FoP copyright-exception of Angola, Armenia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Germany, Malaysia, The Nederlands, Poland, Portugal, Sao Tomé, Serbia, Spain, Suriname, Switzerland, and Timor-Leste.

Copyright rules related to patents are different in different countries.

• See 2D art (paintings etc.).

•    General rule.
• ◯   Exceptions: Very simple design

The design of the payment card is copyrighted by a payment card company, and some payment cards may contain copyrighted characters or artworks through collaboration. The fact that you are the physical owner of a payment card does not mean that you are authorised to replicate the design of the payment card by uploading a copy here. A rare exception to this rule would be the design of the payment card which is simple enough to not exceed the Threshold of originality.

•  Not OK General rule
• OK Exceptions: Public posters in a jurisdiction with FOP not requiring permanence, e.g. China. Pre-1989 US posters: See #Advertisement.

Posters are normally copyright-protected even if the artist is unknown. Thus, images of posters cannot usually be accepted. It normally makes no difference if the poster is in a public place and is freely photographable since Freedom of Panorama, where it exists, typically does not extend to permitting photographs of 2D artworks. Even where it does, posters will usually be excluded since they are normally located temporarily rather than permanently in a public place.

It is sometimes argued that the primary purpose of a poster is advertising, and that the advertiser should be pleased that the image is being widely disseminated by Commons. Such an argument, however, cannot overcome the basic copyright problem: that the uploader is purporting to license to all and sundry (including the advertiser's competitors) an original design that they did not create and do not own.

 Not OK General rule Modern postcards are almost always protected by copyright and copies cannot be hosted here.

OK Exceptions: Old postcards, where the photographer is dead for more than 70 years.

The rules regarding old postcards vary by country. Cards issued by US publishers and first published in the US prior to 1931 are OK, since in that case only US law applies and the US copyright has expired: see Commons:ハートルのチャート. In other countries, old cards may still be under copyright depending on the date of death of the postcard designer or the photographer, and those will need research before Commons can accept them. For example, a card published in 1906 in the UK (or any country now in the European Union) which carries an image by a photographer who died in 1966 will still be protected by copyright until 2036. It is never valid to argue that a copy of a postcard can be hosted here merely because you own the physical card. Physical ownership does not give you the right to infringe copyright by making and uploading a copy of somebody else's work.

OK Exact replicas of public domain works, like tourist souvenirs of the Venus de Milo, cannot attract any new copyright as exact replicas do not have the required originality. Hence, photographs of such items can be treated just like photographs of the artwork itself. However, the photographer still has rights to the work; see Commons:主題別の著作権ルール: 3D art, sculptures etc.

You should assume that a road sign is copyright-protected and may not be uploaded unless you can demonstrate to the contrary. Allowable signs include those that are too simple to attract copyright protection (use the {{PD-ineligible}} tag), those that are old enough to be in the public domain, and those released to the public domain by government policy - e.g. certain signs which are specified within the US Department of Transportation's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Road signs may also be subject to the freedom of panorama if photographed at a publicly accessible place in countries that respect this freedom.

A diagram consists of two aspects that can potentially be protected: the information and the method of illustration. As a general rule, the factual information is not protected except in cases where the idea or digital data is original or creative and owned by right-holders.^[8]

Examples of creative data or information could be:^[9]

• A 3D model representing an ancient temple.
• A set of data based on estimates. Estimates require some form of creativity (often from experts) and should be considered as creative content.
• A set of data based on protected work. For example a 3D scan of a protected sculpture. The scan is not a creative work, but a faithful representation of a protected work becomes a derivative work of this work.

Examples of non-creative data could be ^[9]:

• A 3D scan of a public domain work.
• Data representing phenomena or natural laws, where the choice of initial parameters is insufficiently original to be considered creative.
• Simple diagrams of unprotected or unprotected statistical results.

The method of illustration is generally creative and should be considered protected. Thus, a diagram should be completely redone and differ sufficiently in presentation choices, so that it can not be confused with the original. However, in some cases, the method of illustrating can be particularly simple and not very original and in this case the diagram can be copied directly.^[10] When a diagram conforms to these rules, it can be given {{PD-ineligible}} or {{PD-shape}} rights if any.

• See Art (copies of).

See:

• Noticeboards and signs
• Road signs

• As far as possible, upload each slide as a standalone photograph with suitable source and licensing information.
• Finally, upload the slideshow using the "derivative work of one or more files from Commons" option at Commons:Upload/ja
• Or you may add every source information manually : see the "Collages" section above.

• See the WP:EN article.
• As described in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ursa Minor Dwarf.jpg, if the operation of a pre-positioned recording device involves human judgement, including the intent to capture a specific subject, then it is more likely that the resulting footage or images will be copyrightable.

In the US (where Commons is hosted), taxidermy can sometimes be copyrightable. For example, there is taxidermy that involves mounting animal skin over a copyrighted animal mannequin. See User:Elcobbola/Models#Logical corollary for more information. For certain countries outside the US, freedom of panorama may be relevant to works of copyrighted taxidermy that are permanently installed in public locations.

OK Current Commons policy allows images of vehicles on the basis that the 3D shape of a vehicle will not normally be entitled to copyright protection. Photographs of vehicles are normally acceptable as long as you have taken the photograph yourself. If someone else took the photograph, you need permission from copyright owner (usually the photographer).

 Not OK If the vehicle carries an original painted design, there will be copyright in that design even though there is no copyright in the 3D shape. Unless the design is insignificant enough to be ignored, a photograph of the vehicle may not be uploaded without the designer's permission.