Actually, on second thought, I have removed it from the article completely. It really didn't contribute anything. BigDT00:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (notify | contribs). OR, scan from the NYT from 1934. Is that PD? I'm assuming that they would have renewed their copyright. Copyright tag says that only non-commercial use is permitted, but that's really irrelevant considering that it is just a photographic scan of a NYT article. BigDT11:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC). It has been switched to the newer "newspapercover" license that allows low resolution scans of newspaper stories.[reply]
Uploaded by SinhalaPOWEr (notify | contribs). OR (It'a a graphic picture and I checked pages dealing with the Sri Lanka conflict to make sure that it wasn't being linked, rather than transcluded, as is done sometimes with graphic images. I didn't see anything.) The terms of use require "that it is used to expose the brutality of the Tamil terrorists." If you allow it to be used for only a particular purpose, that's not a free use image. BigDT11:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by SinhalaPOWEr (notify | contribs). OR, terms of use include that "it is used to expose the brutality of the Tamil terrorists." If you allow the image to be used only for one purpose, it isn't free use. BigDT11:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like this to stay, please. Image copyright regulations are I find the most tiresome part of the project: could someone please tell me how I can keep it without waiving copyright. Slacspeak up!01:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You can license it under a free license, such as the GFDL or some of the Creative Commons licenses. These licenses do not take away your copyright, but they do allow anyone to use or modify the image for any purpose, commercial or noncommercial. If you do not agree with such terms, then this image must be deleted. One of the five pillars is that Wikipedia is free content, so your contributions must be freely licensed. —Bkell (talk) 06:16, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I refuse to allow unknown, potentially malicious parties to modify, profit from, or distribute images of me with impunity. This is an absurdity. Please delete the image. Slacspeak up!05:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded by me (notify | contribs). There is a question as to whether IMDb is an acceptable source for publicity photos. I have searched for an alternate free image for Ray Liotta and was unable to find one, so I am bringing this image to Images and media for deletion to decide if this should be deleted or retained under fair use until a free image can be kept. No vote. Can't sleep, clown will eat me21:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Given the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Publicity photos, I suspect we may be seeing a lot of these here. Leaving that aside for the moment, I think that there is a particular issue here. Do we know for certain who the copyright holder of this image is? The fact that it came from IMDB means it is much more likely to be owned by the subject or his agents than many of the images we make that claim on. It seems to me that it would be close to the same amount of effort to find out as it would be to ask for a freely licensed image. Jkelly06:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]