Commons:Deletion requests/File:FBI exhibit - Joe Biggs in the Capitol on January 6, 2021.png

File:FBI exhibit - Joe Biggs in the Capitol on January 6, 2021.png

This file was initially tagged by Fourthords as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: G4: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Joe Biggs from DOJ Case Number 1-21-cr-175 Biggs - Affidavit.png
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as uploader claims (User talk:Túrelio#File:FBI exhibit - Joe Biggs in the Capitol on January 6, 2021.png) license to be o.k. -- Túrelio (talk) 14:03, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

• I'm unsure why this doesn't qualify for speedy deletion under G4, but this is the explanation I included with the {{Speedydelete}}:

  The same image was previously nominated and deleted from this discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Joe Biggs from DOJ Case Number 1-21-cr-175 Biggs - Affidavit.png.

  To elaborate on that original deletion: this video frame simply isn't a US governmental work. The linked source itself is testimony from an FBI agent who writes about the accompanying image, "I have reviewed video footage that was live streamed on the social media site Parler on January 6, 2021. One of those clips shows what I believe to be people entering the Capitol shortly after the events described in the preceding paragraph. One of those individuals, who entered the door within 20 seconds of its opening, is a person that I believe to be BIGGS. In the video, a voice off camera says, 'Hey Biggs, what do you gotta say?' The person depicted below smiles broadly and replies, 'this is awesome!' before pulling his gaiter up to cover his face."

  Fourthords | =Λ= | 14:18, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

• Seems not to be a photo made by a US Federal Gov't employee in course of duties. @Feoffer: is there any counter argument supporting the claimed license? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 23:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

  It's not taken from Parlor, it's taken from the FBI's public domain filing. FBI-published suspect photos are pd-usgov (e.g. File:Fbi wanted.jpg, File:Bhadreshkumar Chetanbhai Patel.jpg for two completely random examples out of what I'm sure are many thousands). Feoffer (talk) 06:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

  The FBI agent's affidavit, which you are sourcing, specifically says the image is from "video footage that was live streamed on the social media site Parler on January 6, 2021." That FBI agent includes a frame of that live-streamed video as evidence, but they themselves did not create it as required by {{PD-USGov}}.

  As for your other two concerns: (a) Considering Ray has previous stints in federal custody before the publishing of File:Fbi wanted.jpg, and their appearance as booking photos, I'm sufficiently satisfied with the claimed provenance. (b) Since Bhadreshkumar Chetanbhai Patel has never been in federal custody, there's no reason to assume File:Bhadreshkumar Chetanbhai Patel.jpg—or any of the miscellaneous disparate photos used on his wanted poster—are the works of the FBI or US federal government, and so I've begun that deletion discussion as well. Fourthords | =Λ= | 12:53, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

  The two images cited are just a few of a multitude. If you disagree with Wikimedia policy that suspect photos published by the FBI are pd-usgov, you shouldn't pick on single image just because I randomly cited it, you should propose a change to Wikimedia policies and generate consensus for that change. I encourage you to withdraw your objection to the single image I randomly cited and instead propose a change to Commons policy. There are literally tens of thousands of images in the same class, perhaps more.

  Decades of Wikimedia precedent are clear: When the US's FBI is distributing a photo of a suspect, US copyright can't be invoked to stop that distribution. Feoffer (talk) 14:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

  Photos taken by the FBI fall into the public domain, because as {{PD-USGov-FBI}} says, they're "a work of a Federal Bureau of Investigation employee, taken or made as part of that person's official duties." This video frame of Biggs is explicitly not a work of the FBI, as stated by the FBI in the affidavit. If the FBI (or federal government at large) shares somebody else's copyrighted work, that doesn't launder the licensing into the public domain; it's still the copyright of whomever was uploading the video to Parler on 6 January 2021. If there's a Commons policy, guideline, or licensing page that explicitly states "the federal government strips third-party copyright holders of their rights by virtue of using or sharing their work", I would be keen to see it. Barring that, this image simply isn't a US governmental work. Fourthords | =Λ= | 16:07, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

  Dozens of years and thousands of images establish the precedent that when the FBI publishes suspect photos, they do so as part of their official duties and the images are PD-USGOV on Commons. To overturn that would result in the deletion of untold thousands of images that are in the public domain under US law because the FBI published them to identify or convict criminals.

  Fourtholds suggests this "strips" someone of their rights, but that's incorrect. The US Gov's right to place individual image of suspects into the public domain does not "strip" the larger work of its protections -- but neither is a federal effort to distribute an image somehow absurdly limited by federal copyright, whether it's the court docket or the congressional record or the FBI -- the Fed get to publish whatever they want and we all get to distribute it. Feoffer (talk) 17:08, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

  Also, not to be POINTY -- it's standard practice to upload the criminal complaint, and I've done so. The image is a crop from that public domain document -- Do you suggest the document also needs to be deleted? Feoffer (talk) 21:02, 16 November 2023 (UTC)