Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with "Andy Wolfe" "Lockheed Martin"

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files found with Special:Search/"Andy Wolfe" "Lockheed Martin"

These are military photos tagged with a form of {{PD-USGov}} (photos taken by US Government employees during their duties are automatically Public Domain). In the description, these photos all have some form of statement "U.S. Navy photo by Andy Wolfe courtesy of Lockheed Martin/Released". This indicates that the photo was taken by Andy Wolfe of Lockheed Martin, not a US Government employee, so {{PD-USGov}} is not valid. To keep the files, we would need evidence of a free license from Andy Wolfe and/or Lockheed Martin.

Consigned (talk) 22:04, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment See also the following related DRs: 1) Commons:Deletion requests/File:F-35C Lightning II at-sea trials 141104-N-ZZ999-017.jpg#File:F-35C Lightning II at-sea trials 141104-N-ZZ999-017.jpg 2 2) Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with "courtesy of Lockheed Martin by" -wolfe. Consigned (talk) 22:21, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per previous deletion request on Commons:Deletion requests/File:An F-35 Lightning II completes a flyover of USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000). (29774535153).jpg which is also an Andy Wolfe picture from Lockheed Martin, "All F-35 Lightning II photography and videography taken by contract photographers (Lockheed Martin, KBRwyle, etc.) in support of F-35 Lightning II flight test are official DoD imagery and in the public domain. " Adding comment to other DRs listed. Elisfkc (talk) 19:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. We are not privy to the arrangements between the DoD and its contractors, and it's really not our job to second-guess the DoD. I understand that humans make mistakes, but given that the DoD has responded to confirm the photos are PD, I think it's safe to take that at face value. Let's avoid copyright paranoia. While I do have concerns about the files' copyright status, my doubts are not significant enough for me to support deletion. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm being a bit pedantic here, but we are actually privy to the arrangements, thanks to the VRT ticket in the other deletion request mentioned above Elisfkc (talk) 03:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and tag all the files with the VRT ticket. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I understand that all indications are that these files are PD. If so, what copyright tag should be used? Our {{PD-USGov}} etc. tags very clearly cover work by employees of the federal government, which is different than these contractor cases. Consigned (talk) 23:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps {{PD-USGov}} and related templates could be updated to cover works for hire? Ixfd64 (talk) 23:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per all the points made in the Keep comments above. Arjun G. Menon (talk) 13:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per Elisfkc. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:36, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]