Commons:Deletion requests/File:Հաղթողաց հրապարակ.jpg

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.

File:Հաղթողաց հրապարակ.jpg

No freedom of panorama in Azerbaijan Ray Garraty (talk) 13:27, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

• Memorial complex in the village of Böyük Tağlar, Khojavend District of Azerbaijan--Ray Garraty (talk) 13:30, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

• Keep/Oppose - Incorrect rationale presented - COM:FOP Azerbaijan states that "The reproduction, or public communication of architectural works, photographic works and works of fine art permanently located in a public place shall be permissible without the author's or other copyright owner’s consent and without paying author’s remuneration". Deleting images such as this would also be highly problematic in general. It would first of all create a precedent for the mass removal of pictures depicting buildings in Nagorno-Karabakh. The town in question, Mets Tagher, has been captured by Azerbaijan during the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war and has been emptied of its Armenian population and this picture represent a historical snapshot into the town before these events. AntonSamuel (talk) 17:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Delete @AntonSamuel: you overlooked something at COM:FOP Azerbaijan. It is for noncommercial purposes only. It is not allowed to reuse images of artworks and architecture created or designed by still-living people (architects/sculptors etc.) or people who have been dead for less than 70 years, if the purpose is for commercial media like post cards and calendars. This is contrary to Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses. Permission from the sculptor (or his heir if he/she is already deceased) is required for it to be hosted here. Or better still, lobby for an amendment/change in copyright law of the country to remove noncommercial restriction for images of copyrighted architecture and sculptures. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:15, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@JWilz12345: In what way would you say its current use is considered commercial? AntonSamuel (talk) 08:09, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@AntonSamuel: there is no issue about current use, but Commons policy also considers the future use. See also Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses. It states that files must be freely reusable for any purposes, including use on post cards, calendars, commercial T-shirt prints, and commercial online vlogs. For the case of images of architecture and sculptures, that means no need to ask for formal permission from the architects, sculptors, or their heirs for every reuse of the images on commercial and/or new media like the ones I mentioned above. Unfortunately, copyrighted works (whose architects or sculptors just died recently or are still living) have copyright durations ranging from 50 (Philippines) to 70 (Azerbaijan and most European countries). Fortunately, countries like Germany, Poland, Armenia, Turkey, and Singapore have freedom of panorama provisions that guarantees photographers, publishers, and online reusers free uses of images of copyrighted architectural and sculptural works without the need of permission from the works' creators or their heirs within the work's duration of copyright. FOP also removes photographers, publishers, and online reusers the burden of paying royalties to the heirs of the architects and/or sculptors. Architectural FOP is only recognized in a dozen countries like USA, Japan, Russia, Denmark, and Syria (while sculptures and other works are not covered by FOP). No FOP, unfortunately, for dozens of countries like ours (the Philippines), France, Greece, UAE, and unfortunately, Azerbaijan. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

AntonSamuel see also the statuses at File:Freedom of Panorama world map.svg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

The disputed nature of the Nagorno-Karabakh region, and the lack of Azerbaijani law imposed on the region at the time of the building of the monument as well as at the time the picture was taken - coupled with the issues I've raised in my previous post puts that interpretation into question I would argue. AntonSamuel (talk) 09:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

---

Deleted: per nomination. Disputed or not, the region in question is recognized as being part of Azerbaijan, so its FOP provisions prevail. ƏXPLICIT 02:58, 22 January 2021 (UTC)