File talk:ChoSh.jpg

Copyright

NBC does not own the copyright on these images; most likely, Cho's family does or he willed them to the public domain. NBC's broadcasting of them suggests he at least gave them permission to show them. Titanium Dragon 00:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. Probably he took that picture himself. Picture also is

# The photograph depicts a non-reproducible historic event, and no free alternative exists or can be created, and

# The image is low resolution and of no larger and of no higher quality than is necessary for the illustration of an article, and the use of the image on Wikipedia is not expected to decrease the value of the copyright

I think this picture should not be deleted!

mixer 03:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue that by mailing the picture to a news agency, Cho released it to the public domain. He apparently did not intend to grant a copyright license for compensation.
H Padleckas 03:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a long dead conversation, but by my understanding of US copyright law: if you create content (pictures, videos, etc) and then exclusively distribute that content to a single person (whereas NBC the corporation is a person before the law and whereas NBC is that exclusive person), then you retain the copyright to the content and grant the receiver of the content display rights to the content. As such, NBC doesn't own the copyright to the images but NBC does (non-exclusively) own the distribution rights to the content. In any case, it's clearly not public domain. However, this image is well within fair use in my opinion (seeing as NBC has released the photo for use at other news agencies as well). Utopianheaven 11:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the author need to formally register something as a copyright in order for it to qualify for that legal status? Cho presumably didn't get a Copyright for these. MSNBC wouldn't be able to either, because it didn't author the content. J.J. Bustamante 12:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All creative works produced 'now' (post 1970s), irrespective of registration are copyright under US law. Including these comments (but we of course release them under the GFDL) Megapixie 13:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Caption

I don't know how to properly tag a comment I leave, so I apologize for that, but isn't the caption for this image in the main Virginia Tech shooting page in bad taste? "Cho must think he's hardcore" doesn't seem very appropriate to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.125.133 (talk) 18:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Captions are embedded in and dependent upon the articles in which images appear. The caption you saw was the result of a vandal's edit and, with all hands on deck watching that article today, it was probably fixed within minutes of when you saw it. --Dynaflow babble 22:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]