User talk:JWilz12345
Add topic|
Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump. |
|
-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 12:43, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
| 04:01 [update] |
|---|
| Commons clock - made from this set [update] |
| Userboxes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
Possible new JF sockpuppet
[edit]Just a head's up. I think this new user (P1898) is another JF sockpuppet. I haven't dug deep into their contributions, but so far they seem to be behaving. —seav (talk) 03:58, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Seav I'll ping @Beeblebrox: whom I messaged on Metawiki about a similar case (meta:User talk:Beeblebrox#Valenzuela400 at enwiki). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 14:37, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
- As a test case, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Burial of Jose Rizal Paco Park marker.jpg (possibly copyrighted text of a plaque). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 14:45, 8 February 2026 (UTC)
Concern about logo copyrights in the Philippines
[edit]I was corresponding with the Copyright Division of the NLP regarding the 1998 Philippine Centennial logo. According to the staff member that emailed me back, "A logo is not included among the copyrightable works under R.A. 8293." I'm not sure how to interpret this, so I'm asking for your thoughts. --Aristorkle (talk) 09:38, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Aristorkle kindly reply back about what kind of work the logo (logos in general) is under the copyright law. Kindly clarify again, considering some relatively simple logos have been granted copyright protection by the IPOPHL as per examples shown at COM:Philippines#Threshold of originality (most notably Photo Sikwate logo). Note that the National Library and the IPOPHL may have differing views.
- Pinging some interested parties here (both from here and abroad, whom I have interacted in multiple occasions concerning copyright-related things): @Chlod, Ralffralff, Seav, Clindberg, Tvpuppy, Yann, Abzeronow, and Rosenzweig: . JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 09:45, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Invitation to discussion about FoP In Bangladesh
[edit]Dear @JWilz12345: ,
I hope you are well. While addressing some recent copyright questions, I read the entire Copyright Act, 2023 of Bangladesh. During this review, I noticed that COM:FOP Bangladesh was removed following the discussion at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright/Archive/2024/09#Bangladesh without full analysis of the law.
After conducting a detailed review of the full statute, I have become reasonably confident that architectural works are not protected by copyright in Bangladesh under the current act. Based on this interpretation, images of architecture and sculptures that are not created by carving or molding should be eligible for upload as free works on Commons.
I have outlined the relevant legal reasoning and citations in a discussion at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#FoP in Bangladesh. I realize the post is quite long, but I attempted to address the issue as comprehensively as possible.
I would greatly appreciate your thoughts and feedback there.Tausheef Hassan Auntu ✉Talk? 19:20, 11 March 2026 (UTC)