allowed
Brand logo under CC BY-SA
The company, as rights holder, releases the logo under CC BY-SA or CC BY and confirms the rights through VRT. A plain text logo without original graphics may be public domain (PD-textlogo).
Tool · image rules in plain language
Wikipedia image checker: can a logo or photo be uploaded
Three questions, nine typical cases and two legal routes. The rules belong to Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons; we only explain them and apply them in every project.
// no sign-up · the result is a guide based on the rules; the final decision rests with the Commons and Wikipedia reviewers
logo.pngcompany mark and wordmark
- ✓Created by: your company
- !Original graphics: yes, so it is not plain text
- !Route: Commons only with a free licence from the rights holder, otherwise a non-free file on English Wikipedia only
File:logo.pnglicence needed
- Author
- VOLTA
- Licence
- only from the rights holder, in writing
- Used in
- nowhere yet
!conditional: a free licence from the rights holder, or a non-free file on enwiki
composition · graphics · tag 1 of 3 passed
photo-from-press.jpgphoto from a press kit
- ✕Rights holder: the agency
- ✕Free licence: none, the rights belong to the agency
- !Watermark: “© agency” on the frame
File:photo-from-press.jpgno free licence
- Author
- Agency (holds the rights)
- Licence
- no free licence
- Used in
- not used
✕do not upload
composition · graphics · tag 0 of 3 passed
logo.svgtext only, plain typeface
- ✓Composition: plain text, no drawing
- ✓Original graphics: none
- ✓Commons tag: PD-textlogo
File:logo.svgPD-textlogo
- Author
- Company N
- Licence
- PD-textlogo
- Used in
- Company N
✓allowed: public domain (PD-textlogo)
composition · graphics · tag 3 of 3 passed
plant.jpgphoto of a manufacturer's plant
- ✓Created by: the manufacturer, BMW Werk Leipzig
- ✓Free licence: CC BY-SA 2.0 de
- ✓Watermark or AI label: none
File:BMW Leipzig MEDIA 050719 Download Karosseriebau max.jpgCC BY-SA 2.0 de
- Author
- BMW Werk Leipzig
- Licence
- CC BY-SA 2.0 de
- Source
- Wikimedia Commons
✓allowed: free licence from the rights holder
composition · graphics · tag 3 of 3 passed
3questions in the check
9typical cases
2routes: free licence or non-free file
€150image licensing from
01Check
Can you upload an image to Wikipedia: three questions
Answer the questions about the file and the verdict appears at once. It is a guide based on the rules of Commons and Wikipedia: the final decision rests with reviewers.
1Who created the image?
2Will the rights holder release it under a free licence in writing?
A free licence: CC BY-SA, CC BY or CC0. This question applies to your own files only.
3Does the file carry a watermark, an agency credit or an AI label?
This question appears only after “Yes” to the second.
the demo runs the branches by itself · click an answer to go through it yourselfmanual
?The verdict will appear here
Answer the questions
Start with the first: who created the image. The next questions appear only when they are needed.
✕Do not upload
You need the rights holder's permission
A press kit, a stock licence, or a photo from social media or an agency is not a free licence. Wikipedia needs a file that anyone can reuse, including commercially. There are two ways out: the rights holder releases the file under a free licence in writing or, for a logo or a cover only, it is uploaded as a non-free file with a rationale on English Wikipedia.
!Caution
The status of AI images on Commons is unsettled
You need a documented chain of rights for a generated file, and its status on Commons is still undefined. Such a file will not be accepted as an illustration for an article about a company. For portraits of executives and premises, a real photo under a free licence is the safer choice.
!Caution
Without a free licence, a non-free file is the only option
The file is yours, but it has not been released under a free licence, so it will not pass on Commons. What remains is a non-free file on English Wikipedia with a fair-use rationale, for a logo or a cover only and only in the article about that subject. Most other language editions do not accept non-free files.
!Fix the file first
Remove the watermark and submit the original
A watermark, an “all rights reserved” notice or an AI label contradicts a claim of free licensing, and the upload will be challenged. Remove them or disclose them honestly, then submit the original file.
✓Allowed
Upload to Commons under CC BY-SA 4.0 or CC BY-NC 4.0
Confirm the rights through VRT: if the uploader is not the photographer, the rights holder confirms the free licence in writing to the Wikimedia volunteers. This is the standard, durable route for your own file.
029 cases
Logos, photos, screenshots, AI: what Wikipedia accepts in each case
The nine situations clients bring most often. The tabs highlight the cases by verdict.
CC0allowed
Public domain and photos under CC
Commons accepts files under CC BY, CC BY-SA, CC0 or in the public domain. Check the author, the source and the text of the licence itself.
RAWconditional
Original shoot by a brand or photographer
Accepted when the rights holder has released the photo under a free licence in writing. If the uploader is not the photographer, the rights are confirmed through VRT.
PDconditional
Historical material in the public domain
Old photos and documents are free once the copyright term has expired. The term depends on the country and the date of publication, so you need a source with a date.
©no
Press photo, “all rights reserved”
This is not a free licence: commercial reuse is prohibited. The only way through is written permission from the rights holder for a free licence.
$no
Stock licences (Shutterstock, Getty)
A paid licence lets you use the file, not everyone who wants to. That does not make the file free.
@no
Photos from LinkedIn, Instagram, a website
Publishing online does not make a file free: the rights stay with the author. Without written confirmation, the file will be deleted.
no
Screenshots of other people's websites
A screenshot is a derivative work of someone else's content. Only the rights holder of the source material can make it free.
conditional
AI images without a clear licence
The status of AI images on Commons is unsettled, and the chain of rights is unclear. Such a file will not work as an illustration for an article about a company: for portraits and premises, use a real photo.
03Two routes
Free licence or non-free file: two routes for a logo
There are two legal routes. Which one is yours depends on whether the rights holder is ready to release the file under a free licence.
1
Rights holder
The company or photographer who created the file and holds the rights to it.
authorfile
2
Written confirmation
The rights holder sends an email to VRT: who the author is and which free licence they grant.
emaillicence
3
Wikimedia Commons
The file is uploaded under CC BY-SA, CC BY or CC0, and a VRT volunteer marks it as confirmed.
free licence
4
Any language edition
A free file can be placed in an article in any language edition of Wikipedia.
all languages
A free licence is irrevocable: once confirmed, anyone can use the file, with credit to the author.
1
Logo or cover
A file for which the rights holder does not grant a free licence but which is needed to identify the subject.
not free
2
Rationale
For each use, a fair-use explanation is written: the source, the purpose, and why no free replacement exists.
sourcepurposeno replacement
3
English Wikipedia only
Under its non-free content rules, English Wikipedia accepts non-free files, not Commons.
enwiki
4
Only the article about the subject
The file is shown in the article about that subject, at low resolution.
one articlelow resolution
Most other language editions do not accept non-free files.
auto
04Originality
Is the photo really yours: six signs to check before uploading
Commons reviewers start checking a new file with these six points. Tick what you can honestly confirm: the verdict updates at once.
1Why it matters
Commons accepts files from the rights holder. If a photographer or an agency took the picture, you need their written transfer of rights, otherwise the photo is not yours.
2Why it matters
Run a reverse image search. If the file is already on a website, on social media or in press coverage, reviewers will find it and ask you to confirm the free licence.
3Why it matters
A watermark or an “all rights reserved” notice contradicts a claim of free licensing, and the upload is challenged at once.
4Why it matters
The original carries the camera model, the lens and the time of the shot. Screenshots and downloads from social media arrive without metadata, which is a common reason for deletion.
5Why it matters
If the frame is filled with other people's works, advertising or branded screens, your photo becomes a derivative work of someone else's rights.
6Why it matters
A free licence gives anyone the right to reuse the file, including commercially, with credit to the author. Once granted, it cannot be withdrawn.
0 of 6 confirmed
?The verdict will appear here
Go through the six signs
Tick each one you can honestly confirm. This is how a Commons reviewer assesses a file in the first minute.
✓All six confirmed
The file will probably survive Commons review
Next, upload the original camera file to Commons under CC BY-SA 4.0. If the uploader is not the photographer, confirm the licence through VRT and keep the original in case a reviewer asks for proof.
Send the file for review →
✕Without the first point, nothing works
The file will probably be deleted
Until the copyright is in your hands, the other points will not save the file: Commons deletes files whose ownership is in doubt. The safer route is a new photo or a written free licence from the rights holder from day one.
Send the file for review →
✕Too many open points
The file will probably be deleted
With this many open points, reviewers flag the file for deletion as a precaution. It is better to fix the rights before uploading, or to start with a new photo and a clean paper trail.
Send the file for review →
!Two open points
Risky: close the gaps first
Two open points are enough for a reviewer to flag the file. Close both before uploading; each can be fixed. The open points are highlighted above.
Send the file for review →
!One open point
Almost there: one point left
One unresolved point can still hurt the upload. Close it first; it is usually quick. It is highlighted above.
Send the file for review →the demo ticks the points by itself · click a point to go through it yourselfmanual
05Mistakes
Why files get deleted: five upload mistakes
Almost every deletion comes down to one of these five mistakes, and each can be fixed before uploading.
- 1
A licence “picked at random”
Someone chooses CC BY-SA because that is “what people usually do”, though they do not hold the rights to the file. The claim is false, and the file is deleted.
✓First work out who the rights holder is, and only then choose the licence. - 2
A photo from the company website without confirmed rights
A file on your website is not free yet. A reviewer will find it through a reverse image search and ask you to confirm the licence.
✓Send the rights holder's written confirmation through VRT. - 3
Watermarks
A “© Company” line or an agency credit contradicts a free licence, and the upload is challenged immediately.
✓Submit the original with no overlays or captions. - 4
A high-resolution logo as a non-free file
Non-free files are shown at reduced size. A full-size logo gets tagged for replacement with a smaller one, or for deletion.
✓Upload the non-free file at low resolution. - 5
Missing rationale
A non-free file without a fair-use explanation for the specific article is tagged for deletion.
✓Write the rationale: source, purpose, why no free replacement exists.
In a page project we do this for you: we pick the route and prepare the confirmation and the rationale.
Page creation →06Service
Image licensing and logo replacement: from €150
When a file does not pass, we make it pass: we choose the legal route, prepare the proof of rights and upload it correctly.
File audit
We look at which of your logos and photos can be uploaded, and by which route. The result is a written opinion.
VRT email
We prepare the template, submit the rights holder's written confirmation and see it through to approval.
Logo replacement
We make a version of the logo without original graphics (PD-textlogo) or build the case for a non-free file for English Wikipedia.
Upload to Commons
Description, categories, licence templates, replies to reviewers.
from €150per file or for the “logo and 2 photos” bundle; included in a page project
Logo replacement
NORDWIND
PD-textlogo
VRT email
I confirm that I am releasing this file under the CC BY-SA 4.0 licence and that I have the right to do so.
✓Commons2 of 2 files ready for Commonsfrom €150
07FAQ
Images for Wikipedia: frequently asked questions
Can we take the logo from our website?
The file from the website is not free in itself: the rights to the logo stay with the company. There are two ways to upload it: the company, as rights holder, releases the logo under a free licence on Commons and confirms the rights through VRT, or English Wikipedia accepts it as a non-free file with a rationale in the article about the company. A plain text logo without original graphics may be public domain (PD-textlogo).
What is VRT and why is an email needed?
VRT (formerly OTRS) is a team of Wikimedia volunteers who verify permissions for files. If the file is not uploaded by its author, the rights holder sends them an email confirming the free licence, and a volunteer marks the file as confirmed. Without the email, the file may be deleted.
Why doesn't a press photo work if we paid for it?
You paid for the right to use the photo, while Wikipedia needs a file that anyone can reuse, including commercially. Only the rights holder, usually the agency or the photographer, can grant that licence, by releasing the file in writing under CC BY-SA, CC BY or CC0. Without it, the file will not be accepted.
Does Wikipedia accept AI images?
The status of AI images on Commons is unsettled: they are assessed case by case, taking the chain of rights into account. Such a file will not be accepted as an illustration for an article about a company, and for portraits of executives and premises a real photo under a free licence is the safer choice.
How many images does a page need?
Usually a logo and one or two photos. No image is required for publication: a page can be published without them. Fewer files with clean rights are better than many doubtful ones.
How much does licensing cost and what is included?
From €150 per file or for the “logo and 2 photos” bundle. Included: a file audit, a VRT email with support through to approval, replacing the logo with a version without original graphics or a rationale for a non-free file, and upload to Commons with a description, categories and licence templates. In a page creation project, licensing is included.
Send the file and its source: we will tell you which route to upload it by
We will tell you whether the file goes to Commons under a free licence or stays a non-free file on English Wikipedia. We reply within one business day.
- 1FileThe logo or photo in its original form, uncompressed.
- 2SourceWho created it and where the file has already been published.
- 3RightsWhether you have the rights holder's written consent to a free licence.