Humanities desk
< January 13	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 15 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 14

Image

Is this image in copyright? Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 01:32, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About when was it taken and when was the book published? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:14, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And was it a work of the US government? (Both the photo and the place you found it.) --76.69.46.228 (talk) 03:22, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. If it's a US government work, it could be public domain. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:00, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems as if was published in Infantry (magazine) in 1947 which is published by the United States Army Infantry School, so it's a work of the US government for the purposes of {{PD-USGov}}. On the other hand, per the Copyright Act of 1909, such publications might contain works that are copyrighted. In this case, there is no copyright notice on the image, so it should fall under {{PD-US-no notice}}. I suggest asking at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions for expert input. Regards So Why 13:13, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that (publisher) was valid in 1947? The magazine in question explicitly says in several different places:

The Infantry Journal is published monthly by Infantry Journal, Incorporated, Publication date: 25th of proceeding month. Publication, Editorial, and Executive Offices: The Infantry Building, 1115 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Washington 6, D. C. Copyright, 1947, by U. S. Infantry Association.

(See [1] or [2] [3] [4]. There are also 2 other copyright notices for other works but not that photo or at least not that came up in the Google OCRed search.) IANAL, this isn't legal advice etc, but this seems to me to be a potentially valid copyright notice for the whole publication. I don't know details about the U. S. Infantry Association and it's possible a lot of the work, especially the photos are actually PD-USGov, but I would be cautious about such assumptions with a lot more analysis. Nil Einne (talk) 10:25, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See also [5] which explicitly notes that copyright was renewed in some cases. Also, I'm not convinced it's the same publication as that discussion in our article. That source suggests it ended in 1950. Nil Einne (talk) 10:27, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]