CT:L

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Licensing.

For discussions of specific copyright questions, please go to Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Discussions that do not relate to changes to the page Commons:Licensing may be moved, with participants notified with the template {{subst:moved to VPC|Commons talk:Licensing}}.

For old discussions, see the Archives. Recent sections with no replies for 60 days may be archived.

Other archives

Seven 2006/2007 discussions organized as subpages, incl. comments added in 2014:

Conspiracy of democracy

I what can you do about it Jesse peers (talk) 23:46, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

@Jesse peers: If you are asking about something regarding licensing here on Wikimedia Commons, please be more specific in your question. Otherwise, I think you're in the wrong place. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:11, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
@Jesse peers: Democracy is the worst form of government in the world, except for all the other ones.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:45, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

Proposal for a more positive wording

Current wording: GFDL is not permitted as the only acceptable license where all of the following are true:

  • The content was licensed on or after 15 October 2018. The licensing date is considered, not the creation or upload date.
  • The content is primarily a photograph, painting, drawing, audio or video.
  • The content is not a software logo, diagram or screenshot that is extracted from a GFDL software manual.

Proposed wording: In order for GFDL to be permitted as the only acceptable license, one more of the following are true:

  • The content was licensed on or before 14 October 2018. The licensing date is considered, not the creation or upload date.
  • The content is not primarily a photograph, painting, drawing, audio or video.
  • The content is a software logo, diagram or screenshot that is extracted from a GFDL software manual.

I'm definitely open to a more positive wording of the second bullet point, describing what is acceptable content instead of what is not. - Jmabel ! talk 00:59, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

I agree with Jmabel that this might actually be easier to understand. I think the point of dot 2 and 3 is to say that if the work originates from either a manual or software then GFDL is okay so you could perhaps just merge those two dots and make it a little wider. --MGA73 (talk) 06:01, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
Also, to avoid any confusion: if someone edits an old GFDL file, the updated version is also valid. --MGA73 (talk) 15:34, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Which versions of album covers are generally fair use?

1200 times 1200 pixels is too big to be fair use, isn't it?

But isn't 300 times 300 pixels too small?! It is in my opinion … ---MIB4u (talk) 22:00, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

@MIB4u: Hi, and welcome. Fair use on enwiki follows en:WP:NFC, and only allows a 0.1 megapixel maximum. Here on Commons, it is not allowed per COM:FAIR.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 22:22, 23 March 2026 (UTC)