Commons:Deletion requests/File:A Boy was Born - Benjamin Britten - page header.jpg
I had a discussion with Magog the Ogre and Stefan4. They have different views about copyright of the scanned title/cover page of the work A Boy Was Born. The image was upload on the purpose of... well, a battle of English spelling. However, the work is copyrighted, and it is still copyrighted in the UK until 31 December 2046. As for the typography, the image is subjected to British jurisdiction of copyright. The text may be ineligible in the United States. Nevertheless, according to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Kingdom#Typographical copyright, a work must be "copyright-expired". As said before, it is still copyrighted, and UK's threshold of originality is very low. This image may be original and copyrighted in UK's POV. George Ho (talk) 21:39, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
- The typographic copyright seems to be separate from the normal copyright and probably belongs to the typographer. The notion at COM:CRT that the protection must have expired is probably meant as a reminder that you should also verify that the underlying text isn't copyrighted. For a typeset text, I would assume that you need permission from both the author of the text (except if the author has been dead for more than 70 years and the text was published more than 50 years ago) and from the typographer (unless the edition was published more than 25 years ago). As this edition seems to have been published more than 25 years ago, there should be no need to ask the typographer for permission.
- As I wrote at COM:VPC#File:A Boy was Born - Benjamin Britten - page header.jpg, I think that there was some recent case where newspaper headlines were found to be copyrighted as literary works. Not sure if the text on this image is copyrightable, though. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:55, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
- The title page says, "To my father — A Boy was Born". It contains "my"; that seems original enough, doesn't it? --George Ho (talk) 22:34, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
- @Stefan4: please provide a source for that. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
- See for example http://www.twobirds.com/en/news/articles/2010/meltwater-newsflash which mentions the British court ruling. I believe that the case was appealed a couple of times and I'm not sure if the linked page describes the outcome at the highest level to which it was appealed or if it describes the outcome at some lower level. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:00, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
- In my opinion, this is simpler even than most news headlines. This is probably just not copyrightable in the UK. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:11, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
- What is the legislature act dealing with typographic copyright? I mean, mere dedication is simple enough, especially with an author's name? --George Ho (talk) 22:15, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
- In my opinion, this is simpler even than most news headlines. This is probably just not copyrightable in the UK. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:11, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
- See for example http://www.twobirds.com/en/news/articles/2010/meltwater-newsflash which mentions the British court ruling. I believe that the case was appealed a couple of times and I'm not sure if the linked page describes the outcome at the highest level to which it was appealed or if it describes the outcome at some lower level. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:00, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
- @Stefan4: please provide a source for that. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
- The title page says, "To my father — A Boy was Born". It contains "my"; that seems original enough, doesn't it? --George Ho (talk) 22:34, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-ineligible. Yann (talk) 20:17, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
