File talk:Metodologija.pdf

This page was subject to a Request for deletion at. The request was closed by the nominator after an actual usage of the file was created, based on a Fair Use claim by the nominator. The nominator edited the page to alter the license information.

The original claim (claims are at least partly substituted to show what existed in the templates as of today, these may be changing: (added) Category:Public domain images

The original upload commentary was explicit that User:Alauc, the uploader, is Ante Lauc, a co-author of the original work.

The new claim is

added Category:Fair use images

This is inaccurate. This is not a "paper," it is a 525-page book, published in 2000 with a limited permission for reproduction, in Croatia. The license permitted any reproduction provided the book was copied without change. It made a statement about changes that is, to me, unclear in meaning, but which seems to suggest obtaining permission.

There is no restriction on commercial reproduction.

It was not first published on Scribd. What is on Scribd is a scan, like this.

The uploader did not claim fair use. The link in the template is not to Wikiversity policy, but to the Foundation licensing resolution.

It is true that Ante Lauc published this elsewhere under a noncommercial license. It is this other later publication (later than the original) which could create, on Commons, an OTRS investigation. Here the author explicitly released the page under PD-self.

There is absolutely no doubt that Wikiversity is permitted to host the upload without change (because of the original notice about reproduction allowed). The issue, then, is not our usage, but possible usage for derivative works, which creates a need for a non-free use rationale, since the goal is fully free content for Wikiversity.

We do have an OTRS page: OTRS. It is radically obsolete, and no user mentioned there is active. It refers to Copyright issues, which completely neglects the possibility of any non-free usage. That page links to Copyright which similarly neglects allowed non-free usage.

Regardless, if the file is PD, we can use it unconditionally, and if it is Fair Use or other Non-free permitted use, we can use it, under certain conditions, unless something else can be found that is clearly and fully free without question. I am leaving this comment for the future. Had this file been deleted, the release into the public domain, certainly by the author, would be hidden. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 20:57, 18 March 2014 (UTC)