Commons:Deletion requests/Category:PD Italy

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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.

Category:PD Italy

[edit]

I already called attention on this template, used together with Template:PD-ItalyGov, which stands on very shacky ground. It is being used as a way to intoduce a sort of "fair use" category for Italy, where the "fair use" discipline does not exists.

Please have a look at it and consider how it is been used, simply to surround the fact that images published in the it:Wikipedia under the only "{{PD-Italia}}" (a fancy name for "fair use" in this Wikipedia) license may not be otherwise uploaded in Commons (see for an example among others here: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Achille_Starace.jpg where, where, as in all {{PD-Italia}} images, it is cleary given the instruction: "Do not move this file to Wikimedia Commons!".

The 93/98 EC directive is normally interpreted as overruling the older national directives, including those valid in Italy until 1998 to wich this template refers.

Please give your piece of mind and help in settling the matter. In my opinion, this template should be banned, and the images checked, one by one, to see whether some other copyright tags might be used instead, otherwise moved to it:Wikipedia under a {{PD-Italia}} license, valid for Italy. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 17:37, 26 December 2008 (UTC) --User:G.dallorto (talk) 17:38, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is it you are proposing to delete? A template? A category? Clarification is needed. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Both. The template, AND the category, since Template:PD-ItalyGov pour all of its files into the category.
Meanwhile, I discovered a previous discussion had been held on this very same topic before,
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:PD-Italy

and that its conclusion was (quote:

"Decision. PD-Italy will be deleted as PD-Italy is incompatible with the copyright policy of Wikimedia Commons that requires freely licensed images only. A summary of the reasons...." (please follow the link to read the rest).
It therefore appears now to me that the Template:PD-ItalyGov, which merely leads to a revived Category:_PD Italy (notice: "PD-Italy" was disbanded, and "PD Italy" - without a slash - was re-created), is but a trick created to surround a vote and a decision already taken about the matter. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 18:09, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PS Since the page in the category do no list all of the files where the ItalyGov template has ben used, please refer to this page http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:PD-ItalyGov instead. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 18:13, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am still confused. We have PD-Government for many countries. {{PD-ItalyGov}} seems rather similar to those. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:18, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The point is merely there is no Italian law allowing the PD-ItalyGov template... Italy has not even a law allowing the "Freedom of panorama", and the Governement does not want images of works of art it owns to go around... Of course, if you can cite me any such a law (the template refers to the old, superseded, pre-EU directive, as well as pre-war one, even mentioning the exemption made in favour of the "Fascist party"... I' m not joking, just follow the link!), I'd be happy. I'd be spared a lot of useless work to clean up the mess ;-) --User:G.dallorto (talk) 18:26, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete per Lupo's Template talk:PD-ItalyGov#This template is on very shaky grounds (see below Lupo's comment)--Trixt (talk) 08:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep PD is PD. We never had any problem with these images. --Sailko (talk) 07:15, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep - the claim that PD-Italy is "a fancy name for "fair use" in [it.wiki]" deserves, at best, a {{citation needed}}. Balabiot (talk) 10:07, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    (note: this is not to mean that PD-ItalyGov makes any sense. Also, note that the PD-Italy category on it.wiki states that the images should not be moved to commons, exactly because PD-Italy was already deleted on commons once. My vote for keep means that the it.wiki pictures PD-Italy should be moved back to commons, and PD-ItalyGov should be deleted). Balabiot (talk) 10:12, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep is PD!!! Lo Scaligero (talk) 11:06, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I agree with all of the above comments in favor of keeping. People who want to delete are ridiculously over-zealous Charvex (talk) 11:45, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete per my previous comments at Template talk:PD-ItalyGov#This template is on very shaky grounds. According to a leading Italian commentary on the copyright law, the copyrights are held by the government during a 20-year term and revert thereafter to the real author for the remainder of the 70-year term. Lupo 21:03, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Lupo you are definitely wrong. And G.dallorto you are wrong as well. I cannot believe that an Italian wants to destroy and delete material connected to his home country here. G.dallorto what the heck makes you that sure that the template is "on very shaky grounds"? Who told you that Lupo is right? Why do you just accept what Lupo states as correct? Ever tried to investigate the truth and also whether he is right or not? I tell you again that you and even more Lupo are more than wrong. Read what I have written to what Lupo is trying to sell here for the ultimate truth. The truth is in fact that you Lupo did not understand what law commentaries are for and how to understand what can be found there. And you have also obviously no clue of Italian law as well no clue of law in general. I agree with all of the above comments in favor of keeping and as said in my answer to the incompetent statement by Lupo I will prove in the next time that either template and category are in rule with Italian law by a verdict of highest Italian court which is not a worthless statement taken from a minor opinion in a law commentary but legally binding law. And so I will prove that the template is on very solid grounds instead hoping to end this kind of discussion for good. Reptil (♣) 10:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I removed your useless personal attacks. Please avoid personal attacks and assume good faith, or you will be blocked from editing.--Trixt (talk) 11:45, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reptil, I can read Italian, since Italian is my own language, and I can tell you for this reason that what Lupo reads in the legal commentaries to me seems exactely what the commentaries say. We have other examples, for instance in the copyright for a written text. You may sell it for a maximum of 20 years to a publisher, and after 20 years, it does not fall into the PD, but it reverts to the author. I know it since I am an auhtor myself. I can't see why only in case of images the Intellectual rights should not revert to the author.
Second, there is no reason why an Italian should not want to remove images that are (IMHO) unlawfully posted in Commons just because they deal with Italy. Quite the other way. It is because I am Italian that I am reorganising and clearing the Italian area, in order to have a tool that can be safely used not only by it:Wikipedia, but by anyone else. I don't like this bizarre idea that since I am Italian I have to stick to anything Italians do, uncluding illegal things. That sounds to me like Mafia. Enough said.
Third, my objection here is not that there are not images that are in the PD since they were produceed by the State (e.g. stamps from the Kingdom of Italy surely are PD-ItalyGov, however, they are also merey PD-Old, so I can't see the necessity of this template...), but only that the images I find in such category do not belong there, or that no evidence was given by the uploader about this fact. Therefore, please, chanting that "PD is PD" is simply ridiculous. Of course PD is PD. But "copyvio is copyvio", dear Sailko. Please remind it.
Fourth, I am rather fed-up with the fact that no one of the Italians who voted for "keep" ever give us a reason why. Their reason is that these images "should not be deleted", and that they "do not want o have them deleted". These are not reasons, these are wishful thoughts. Now, let's get real. Let me take the very first image appearing in the catgory PD-Italy: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Andrea_Doria_9.jpg
This is a scan from a Polish book: "W. Supiński, L. Błaszczyk, Okręty wojenne 1900-1966, Warsaw, 1967".
Since this is a book, there was the possibility to check author and copyright statue of the images. Neither thing was done. The image is simply given as PD since it was "Created by the government of Italy". Now, we are not even discussing about whether PDItalyGov makes sense or not. We are discussing about: where the information about this image having been produced by the Italian govenrment comes from? And how can you know it, if you don't know who the author is? This is nonsense. To know about copyright status you need to know about the author. Reasoning the other way rouns (since we assume these images are in the PD, then who cares abnout their author!) is mere nonsense. In short, please stop to vote "keep" without giving a reason. These votes, in Commons, count for nothing. Even if 100% of votes were in favour of keeping a copyvio, the copyvio should be removed.
So please give (1) evidence of authorship of the images posting a PD-ItalyGov tag (2) give evidence of the fact that in Italy a law exists stating that works paid for by the government fall into the PD after 20 years. I know myself thet legislation is often uncertain. But in our case, first I don't like the fact that Reptile merely promises he will someday, when he feel comfortable, provide evidence. If he knows something we don't know, why does he not simply tell it us? That should be the reason for these debates! Secondly, since we guarantee that all files online in Commons are free from any rights, in case of doubt, for a prudencial reason we should delete them waiting to know better about the matter. They can always be undeleted when we get evidence about their PD status. (3) Since we are at it, I wonder why images from LEGITIMATE sources are not sought after and uploaded. Why not asking the Marina Italiana so that they provide freely usable images ? It it THAT difficult to do? This is the thing I would do if I were in the place of those who object. The truth is that the Marina was contacted in the past, and first gave a permssion, then when asked for a formal "ticket", i.e. a written permission, refused to do so. Therefore, we DO NOT have the permission from the source to keep those images. Is this enough?
Best wishes.

--User:G.dallorto (talk) 20:07, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


About some of G.dallorto's fancy statements:

  • "It is being used as a way to intoduce a sort of "fair use" category for Italy, where the "fair use" discipline does not exists."
    • false: a "discipline" of fair use does exist in Italy (see, in particular, text in red). Apart from this, PD-Italy is a form of PD, and nobody at any level is making such a confusion between PD and fair use. It is used as a PD.
  • "images published in the it:Wikipedia under the only "PD-Italia" (again, a fancy name for "fair use" in this Wikipedia)"
    • false and misleading: the Italian copyright Act (LDA) is very very clear about the point and cannot be confused with any kind of fair use. It is a PD and IT IS NOT USED AS A FAIR USE IN IT.WIKI!!!
  • "the instruction: "Do not move this file to Wikimedia Commons!"" has been added to it.wiki after an endless discussion here on Commons showed that this community wasn't going to accept any more this PD and admins started to delete images. The sense of the message is: "don't waste your time, it cannot be kept there" and also: "Don't run a bot to transfer this file and delete it on it.wiki". Nothing more than that.
  • "The 93/98 EC directive is normally interpreted as overrluing the older national directives, including those valid in Italy until 1998 to wich this template refers"
    • false and misleading: the acts by which this matter is ruled are "Legge 22 aprile 1941 n. 633, modificata dalla legge 22 maggio 2004, n. 128 articolo 87 e articolo 92". This is clearly stated in the template. (btw, "1998" truly was overruled by "2004", so this is what you need to look at, and there is no reason to specifically recall a date in which specifically no acts were issued about this matter); this means that Italy, well after the European Act, modified its law to accept and introduce only part of the directive, and not all of it. Interpretations are interpretations, however the Act is in its full validity in Italy and this is the only concrete thing on the ground. The Italian law says it is PD, so - should you like it or not it - it is FREE material. If you really don't like it, don't keep it; but there is no need to justify this decision. Even less need can be seen of justifying it with lies.

So, better to know Italian law, and even more useful it would be if someone could also read the concerning Italian act (and the Italian Wikipedia, if you wish), before trolling, presuming bad faith and writing false things. Thank you. - 207.97.213.169 12:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-ItalyGov Deleted per the comprehensive arguments of G.dallorto and Lupo. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-Italy as a result of which this template has already been deleted once. It appears to have been recreated without permission or discussion. I have left the PD Italy category for now; it can be deleted once it is emptied. MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Category:PD_Italy&oldid=233552865"