Jump to content

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2015 June 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 17 June 19 >

June 18

[edit]

File:Toyota Cressida MX-3.jpg

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Toyota Cressida MX-3.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Edinboro.jpg

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Edinboro.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Graf Zeppelin 3 Reichsmark 1930.jpg

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 15:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Graf Zeppelin 3 Reichsmark 1930.jpg (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • Image consists largely of a detailed photograph of a commemorative coin issued in Germany in 1930. According to Commons:Currency, Germany does not exempt coins from copyright. Thus, the coin is definitely copyrighted in the US because it was in copyright in Germany on the URAA date. —Darkwind (talk) 11:25, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In an abundance of caution, I have added an extensive non-free rationale supporting use of the image of this 1930 commemorative 3 RM coin issued by the Weimarer Republik, a government that has not existed since 1933. In addition copyright ownership or protection (if any) of any elements of this design ever having passed to any of the several subsequent (including the current) German governments does not appear to have been established. Centpacrr (talk) 00:11, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unfree coin. Copyrighted in the United States per URAA. Possibly copyrighted in Germany, depending on when the engraver died. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The engraver or engravers are unknown as the designs on the obverse and reverse are anonymous and unsigned, the designs were also created by him/her or them in the course of their employment by the then government of Germany (Weimarer Republik) which ceased to exist in 1933, and neither the engravers nor their heirs would have had personal economic or other interest, if any, in the designs or their use after their creation as there would be no other possible legal use for them other than monetary coinage. The Weimar Republic government was followed by other governments (Deutsches Reich (1933–43), Großdeutsches Reich (1943–45), Allied-occupied Germany (1945-49), BRD West (1949-90), DDR East (1949-90)) which are also now defunct. The discussion thread referred to above on "German currency" does not in any way seem to authoritatively address the issue of the § 5 Abs. 1 UrhG "recent lower court decision" regarding potentially retroactively providing any form of ex post facto copyright protection to the designs on coinage of any of these periods. The only coins it appears to discuss at all are those for the modern Euro. However in an abundance of caution, the image (which I created) also now includes an extensive non-free rationale for its use in the article which it illustrates even though that seems wholly unnecessary. Centpacrr (talk) 20:27, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • All wrong:
  1. Those who have created artworks can't be anonymous under German law under any circumstances unless the work was created on 1 July 1995 or later. See de:Anonymes Werk (Urheberrecht)#Frühere Rechtslage in Deutschland / Übergangsrecht. Thus, the coin was not created by anonymous engravers, and the German copyright law states that the copyright expires in Germany 70 years after the death of these engravers.
  2. In other situations (i.e. photographs, literary works or post-1995 works), the author is only anonymous if the identity of the author hasn't been revealed within 70 years from publication of the work. It is sometimes possible to find the identity of the author of an unsigned work in other ways.
  3. Whether a government is defunct or not is irrelevant. If a government becomes defunct, the next government inherits all of its property. Besides, the government you denote as 'BRD West' is not defunct; see the Bundesrepublik Deutschland article.
  4. In the court ruling you are referring to, it was concluded that {{PD-GermanGov}} only can be used for works of literature, but not for works of art. It is irrelevant when the work was created.
  5. Wikipedia is not hosted in Germany but in the United States. In United States, the copyright term of a German coin from the 1930s is 95 years from publication, regardless of when the copyright expires in Germany.
The coin is cleary copyrighted in the United States and it is likely also copyrighted in Germany. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide specific sources to support your claims 2-5. Centpacrr (talk) 00:58, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
2: See the German copyright law. 3: See the article linked in the claim 3 above. 4: See the lead section of c:Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review. 5: See the United States copyright law. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply but it does not really answer my questions. Again please provide specific sources that support your claims, to-wit: 1-2) the specific section (with link) of the German Copyright Law that you believe states that coinage (including that of earlier defunct, non-contiguous German governments) ever were or are now copyright protected, if such protection was owned by "the engraver", and did not expire until "70 years after his/her/their death(s)"; 3) the source for this claim as the cited WP article does not seem to address that the BDR ever inherited copyright protection rights for Weimar Republic coin designs produced by that defunct government, if any such rights ever in fact existed under any German copyright law past or present, or if so that such rights were passed on to the Deutsches Reich (1933–43), Großdeutsches Reich (1943–45), or interim Allied-occupied government of Germany (1945-49); 4) this article refers only to images on postage stamps, not coins, which are very different in character and in any potential of other uses with economic value than are the designs on monetary coinage which have no other legal uses that could possibly benefit or be controlled by a government employed designer; 5) the specific section (with link) of the US Copyright Law that you claim states that German coins (including those of defunct, non contiguous, German governments) are or ever have been copyrighted in the US. Centpacrr (talk) 18:28, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You can find the specific sections by looking at the relevant laws, for example s:United States Code/Title 17. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:54, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I am familiar with 17 USC but I do not see any language in there that specifically supports your contentions. What I asked you to direct me to the specific sections(s), if any, you are relying on with regard to potential US copyright protection of the design of a 1930 Weimar Republic coin. The same goes for the current German copyright law and the purported language in the the German lower court decision on postage stamps the designs of which are often not produced by Government employees in the course of their employment. With respect you still have not answered any of the questions I asked above. Centpacrr (talk) 01:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
While not an official guideline or policy on the English Wikipedia, enwiki admins have traditionally closed media deletion discussions in line with the precautionary principle used on Commons. In line with that principle, one does not have to find out who an original artist/author was, nor look for specific court decisions on a particular subject matter, in order to assume that a particular item is under copyright. Yes, finding that information would help guide the debate, but this is not necessary to conclude that the item is likely under copyright and should be deleted. —Darkwind (talk) 06:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Irrespective of whether or not the design of this 1930 German Weimar Republic is subject to copyright protection under Title 17 which I still doubt, the image also has an extensive non-free rationale for its use in the one article in which it is used as an illustration. Centpacrr (talk) 11:47, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Activ Trak - Employee Activity Monitoring Software; Logo.png

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived inquiry of the possible unfree file below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: deleted as copy vio on June 18. Diannaa (talk) 21:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Activ Trak - Employee Activity Monitoring Software; Logo.png (delete | talk | history | logs).
  • "This file is in the public domain, because It was available for download by a specific download link." Is not a valid pubic domain rationale. The image is copyrighted and would likely be usable as a {{non-free logo}}, however the article is currently in Draft: space so usage there wouldn't yet satisfy WP:NFCC. Image could be reuploaded under a claim of fair use if the draft is approved. Nick⁠—⁠Contact/Contribs 15:19, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2015_June_18&oldid=1255128465"