Commons:Deletion requests/File:1066 ticket front.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:1066 ticket front.jpg

Although this is boilerplate text, the British threshold of originality is much lower than this, and thus a copyright can be assumed to have attached to this work. Under the precautionary principle, it should be deleted.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:09, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

 Keep AFAIK, railway tickets in the United Kingdom are ineligible for copyright. The issue has previously been discussed at en:Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2014/September#Railway tickets where it was not definitively stated that there was a copyright violation. I note that only the two images I uploaded have been targeted for deletion, yet other examples of this ticket are not. Mjroots (talk) 14:47, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

• Those were the only two that came on my radar. I'll be glad to go through the rest of them. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:09, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

• This logo was held to be copyrightable by British courts (see the deletion request). This ticket is easily more original than the logo in question. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:02, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Keep. The nominator has made an incorrect assessment of the British threshold of originality, based on an apparent misreading of this case, wherein the court specifically enunciated the presence of unique font elements in a logo as a basis for originality. The nominator has not shown that the British Rail tickets at issue contain anything other than standard fonts in an arrangement entirely dictated by the function of a rail ticket. Furthermore, the nominator has individually nominated dozens of similar files for the exact same reason, when the proper approach would have been to make a single nomination of all files, so that discussion could have been kept in a single place. In order to avoid disparate results, if one of these is kept, they should all be kept. Ideally, the nominator will withdraw these multiple discussions and file a single discussion. BD2412 T 20:08, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
• Delete Obviously within the Threshold of originality. en:Crown Copyright rules likely apply - British Rail was , but 1986+50=2036, so we have quite a wait on that count. It may be one of the exemptions to crown copyright, but that needs proven. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:49, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Keep I see no originality at all. If ever there is any threshold, this is far below it. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 08:07, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

---

 Kept, does not surpass thrreshold of originality. Taivo (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2015 (UTC)