On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 8:13 PM, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: > On 23 October 2011 00:19, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I am *amazed* that it took a whole month for someone to mention it on >> [[:en:Talk:Mickey Mouse]], and another half an hour before someone >> (me) replaced the image in the article itself ... > > > And I've just done a version without the text or flag: > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%22Appreciate_America._Come_On_Gang._All_Out_for_Uncle_Sam%22_%28Mickey_Mouse%29%22_-_NARA_-_513869_-_cropped_and_tidied.png > > Is this the very first ever derivative image of Mickey Mouse not in > any manner approved of by the Walt Disney company but that is, > nevertheless, 100% absolutely legal? > > BTW - the Commons deletion discussion that included a renewal search: > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:%22Appreciate_America._Come_On_Gang._All_Out_for_Uncle_Sam%22_%28Mickey_Mouse%29%22_-_NARA_-_513869.tif
On what grounds is it out of copyright? Doesn't a derivative work carry (at least) two copyrights, the one on the original work, and the one on the derivative (which "extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work")? _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
