Talk:Che Guevara (photo)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Birds
Cuba Portal
Che Guevara (photo) is within the scope of WikiProject Cuba. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article is on a subject of Mid priority within the scope of Wikiproject Cuba.
Cuba To-do:
This page is within the scope of WikiProject History of photography, a project to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on the history of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] Public domain?

Is this image in the public domain or not? 8thstar 23:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not in public domain; see the reference by Sarah Levy. — Carl (CBM · talk) 23:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I disagree CBM and have read the full report by Levy. The photo's legal status has never been defined in the U.S. - and thus until it is, it would be in the Public domain under Cuban law which would govern it. I discuss the legality HERE    Redthoreau (talk Redthoreau 08:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ubiquitous redirects to omnipresent

Jon Anderson says on that very same page "eventually becoming the famous poster image that adorned so many college-dorm rooms." That is not the same as ubiquitous, as Anderson is saying that it appealed to a certain age and education group. It's not like the Pople.–Mattisse (Talk) 23:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what a Pople is ?       Redthoreau (talk Redthoreau 23:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Also ubiquitous can be used as "everywhere" which an image that gets named the MOST famous Photograph in the world ... would qualify as.       Redthoreau (talk Redthoreau 23:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Also nothing redirects to anything, the wiki was removed = by you.       Redthoreau (talk Redthoreau 23:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] dubious sentence about public domain

I don't get the sentence "Until the photo receives a definitive legal declaration in a U.S. court, it appears that it will be in the public domain there". If this does go to US court, their decision will not be that the photo has been in public domain up to that point, but will become copyrighted after their decision. Rather, they would find either that it has been public domain and will remain so after their decision, or it has been copyrighted and will remain so. — Carl (CBM · talk) 10:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the sentence as I agree it sounded unclear, the way I wrote it last night.    Redthoreau (talk Redthoreau 17:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I like the better description of the lawsuit against Reporters Without Borders that you added. — Carl (CBM · talk) 18:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks.    Redthoreau (talk Redthoreau 17:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)