This image does not meet the threshold of originality and the text does not qualify as a literary work, so I believe it should be marked as such 277volts (talk) 20:59, 8 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Currently battling with a few bots who all want to reduce the image size because the license is tagged as "non-free". OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 19:58, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this too but apparently at the commons discussion for the deletion of the file at c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Canvas Hack Screenshot 2026-05-07 18-20-00.png they say that "the message in this screenshot is too complex for Template:PD-text, as the demands have enough creative choice in their expression/phrasing/wording to meet the 'modicum of creativity' required to qualify for copyright protection in the US."

I don't know if that's true or not but I don't think this particular text can be copyrightable -- like for example the c:File:Twitter_bitcoin_spam_apple_2020-07-15_(uncensored).png KrispyBlueJays (talk) 02:00, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The current resolution of the image doesn't really make sense to me. If the text is copyrighted, the current low-resolution version that keeps the text readable would have the same "impact on the commercial viability of the art" as the high-resolution version. (and if the text isn't copyrightable, there's no reason to use a low resolution version) Not Invisible (talk) 01:52, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I boldly reverted it to the original version. The bots automatically reduced the resolution. Kibblebrain (talk) 07:11, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And further to that, at least two of these bots ignore my {{nobots}} tag. I would have thought that approved bots should have the basic courtesy to respect nobots template. Not fun to have edit wars with bots. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 20:25, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]