In regards to this picture, the copyrights are unclear, and at the time of uploading, the "promotional" tag was the most appropriate. It is possible th epicture is now public domain, as it is from a 1950s vintage book on which the copyrights have likely expired, and no copyright renewals appear to have been filed. As used to illustrate the character Zacherley as protrayed by John Zacherle, however, this should be a perfectly acceptable fair use. TheRealFennShysa 16:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Do you have access to that book? Can you tell if the book was published with a © sign or not? – Quadell (talk) (random) 14:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Not at this time. I scanned the image from a copy in Zacherle's personal collection while interviewing him for a documentary two years ago. TheRealFennShysa 15:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Quadell, do you think it makes a difference that the image is "in character". ie the image is not really being used to identify "John Zacherle" but is being used to identify "John Zacherle in character" which is a different thing. I wonder if I was incorrect in tagging this. An "in character" photo would not be replaceable in the same way a standard head shot would be. Rossrs 07:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- It does matter. This is fair use if the image is being used to illustrate the character, and not the actor. So it would be best to use it in the section of the actor's article that describes this role. – Quadell (talk) (random) 18:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
