Template talk:Tv-screenshot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This template or project page is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Fair use, a project that aims to improve and monitor fair use on Wikipedia and prevent gratuitous copyright infringement. If you would like to help, please see the project page for more information.

Template:Tv-screenshot has been protected indefinitely. Use {{editprotected}} on this page to request an edit.

Contents 1 Capitalization and Template:Television-screenshot 2 "ident" 3 Recent change 4 4 Criteria for Fair Use 5 Question on use 6 Misuse

[edit] Capitalization and Template:Television-screenshot

I tried to find this template earlier and was thrown off by the capitalization. That is, I looked for Template:TV-screenshot and thus did not find Template:tv-screenshot. And, when I couldn't find a TV-specific fair use tag for TV, I created my own: Template:Television-screenshot.

So, how can we best merge all these together? I think Template:tv-screenshot should be the standard. Should there be redirects from the other forms of it? Can you use redirects with templates? --Jeremy Butler 20:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it's OK to redirect templates (it's OK if it works). I know it's not OK to redirect categories as Mediawiki doesn't support that yet, so the article ends up not being categorized properly.

chocolateboy 21:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "ident"

Since "ident" is a term used only in the U.K. and Australia, as far as I know, shouldn't it be replaced with a term that's more universal? It's definitely not used in U.S. broadcasting. --Jeremy Butler 20:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I changed the spellings/terminology to US as the context is United States copyright law.

chocolateboy 05:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent change

This template is now included in the category Category:Screenshots of television. [1] That makes sense for the screenshots, but may (if the intention was to highlight this template on that page) or may not (templates aren't screenshots) make sense for the template. Was that deliberate?

chocolateboy 13:12, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 4 Criteria for Fair Use

Under US copyright law, there are four factors for determining "fair use":[2]

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

I'd recommend that the tv-screenshot template create a bullet list that highlights these factors, which the current revision makes a start at:

It is believed that the use of a limited number of web-resolution screenshots

• for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents
• on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation,

qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law.

which might be revised thus:

It is believed that the use

• of a very limited portion of the original work (one frame out of thousands),
• which will likely have no detrimental impact on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work,
• for criticism, comment, scholarship, and research on the station ID or program and its contents
• on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation,

qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law.

Note: I removed "web-resolution screenshots" because resolution has no impact on a fair-use defense. Same goes for "identification." --Jeremy Butler 12:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question on use

If someone uploads a tv-screenshot of a person in a program and uses it in the article about the actor, is it acceptable fair use (f. ex. Jamie Hyneman, Dan Rather)? How about 5 tv-screenshots in one article? Also is the tv-screenshot usable in an article about a fictional character that the actor plays (f.ex. George_Costanza, Rachel_Green)?

Or for example a tv-screenshot of a building, is it usable in an article about the building?

Currently the license says:

• for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents

the last 3 words "and its contents" give an ambiguous open-ended suggestion for possible usage of tv-screenshots. feydey 15:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC) feydey 15:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I would have thought that a limited number of screenshots (preference = one) of an actor is acceptable, so long as their role in the show is discussed in the article. This is the difference from magazine covers: most articles using a magazine as fair use to identify the person on its cover didn't/couldn't discuss the magazine in the article. ("Tom Cruise appeared on the front cover of the Radio Times" would hardly be fitting for his article.)

So, the actor is a "content" of the TV show, so I think we're OK there. The image caption would need to specify its source. "Dan Rather, from a telecast in October 2004", is, in my opinion, unsatisfactory -- the program needs to be cited.

I'm unsure about the meaning of 'critical commentary', however -- I don't think that fits in with an encyclopedia in either of its senses.

I think screenshots of buildings, though, are less acceptible -- unless that specific TV show can be legitmately mentioned in the article, which, in most cases, I doubt. Like my Tom Cruise example, mentioning that Durham Cathedral (hypothetical example) was on Britain's Best Buildings is a slight understatement. Plus, it is much easier to get a free alternative for most buildings than it is actors.

I appreciate your previous comments that a fair use image disguises the fact that we need a free use replacement. I wonder if we could come up with some system that made the need for free use more transparent in fair use images? The JPS ^{talk to me} 18:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Misuse

In all our talk of fair use, we also need to keep a look out for misuse of this tag. I've just caught Image:Facade.jpg: the meta-data clearly says that this isnt't a screenshot! I'm sure there are others. I'll assume good faith and assume that uploaders don't understand what a screenshot is. It is always possible that some will be hoping we don't notice, though. The JPS ^{talk to me} 18:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Per discussion at Wikipedia:Fair use review#30 November 2006 pertaining to Image:Chandra suresh.JPG, I think some clarification is in order, perhaps just in a <noinclude> usage note. – Anþony  talk  12:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)