Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alger FSGPF.jpg

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.

File:Alger_FSGPF.jpg

[edit]

Where is the evidence for the used `Free Art License`? In 1930 this license did not exist 80.187.96.26 19:18, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This question in french Bistro (20 November) has this answer : Le motif de suppression est très absurde et même non valide. ( It is a very silly and no valid question) .... Jur@astro (Discuter avec le Sphynx jurassien) 20 novembre 2011 à 12:27 (CET).--Claude PIARD (talk) 11:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ce document est le scan, à fin d'introduction sur Commons et dans les locaux même de la fédération, de la première page du bulletin fédéral de Juillet 1930. Le président Jean Vintezl m'a établi une attestation générale pour ce genre de procédure, attestation déjà communiquée en fichier à wikimédia-permission. Est-il indispensable de la renvoyer ? Comment ? Sinon, s'il ne s'agit que d'une erreur - de bonne foi - sur le choix de la licence, pouvez-vous me conseiller utilement sur le choix le plus judicieux ? Je comprends d'ailleurs mal la réfutation de ce choix au seul argument que la formule elle-même serait postérieure à 1930. Cela voudrait-il dire que tout document antérieur à la date de création de cette licence ne peut en bénéficier ?--Claude PIARD (talk) 20:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This file is the scan, to be introduced in Commons, of the first page of federal newspaper (July 1930). Our president, Jean Vintzel, give me a paper to do this thing. I have sent this one to Wkimedia-permission. If "free art licence" is not correct, what else, please ? And why a thing older as this licence cannot use it ?--Claude PIARD (talk) 20:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is an abstract of federal newspaper, a very public thing. And it is no case of copyvo : the actual president of this federation give me a paper to use this kind of thing. I can send it to you. But where and how ? What else licence to use in this case ? Please, do not delete this file, very usefull to this paper. Sory for my poor english and good night.--Claude PIARD (talk) 21:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Remarquant que cette demande, qui me semble peut-être paradoxale, émane d'une IP je m'interroge sur sa légitimité et transmets cette demande sur le Bistro.--Claude PIARD (talk) 10:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This question in french Bistro (20 November) has this answer : Le motif de suppression est très absurde et même non valide. ( It is a very silly and no valid question) .... Jur@astro (Discuter avec le Sphynx jurassien) 20 novembre 2011 à 12:27 (CET).--Claude PIARD (talk) 11:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify: that's the Bistro on the French Wikipedia and not the one on Commons. See fr:Wikipédia:Le Bistro/20 novembre 2011#Fichier:Alger FSGPF.jpg for reference. The rationale for the proposed deletion is not absurd. At the time of nomination, it was claimed that this 1930 publication is copyrighted and published under the specific terms and conditions of the Free Art License. This is unlikely and would indeed require some verifiable evidence.
That claim has since been changed to indicate that the file is in the public domain because the author has supposedly been dead for more than 70 years. However, there is not sufficient evidence to verify that claim either. The main copyrightable element of the cover is the photograph. (The logotype may also be copyrightable.) A photographer active in 1930 would not have been dead for more than 70 years unless they died within about 10 years of taking the photo. The photographer is clearly named "A. Bienvenu" (or is that "Bieavenu"?), so ({{Anonymous-EU}} does not apply either. Information on when the photographer died is needed to determine whether the photograph is protected by copyright. If it is protected by copyright, licensing permission from the heirs is needed. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:26, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Was the first licence more pertinent ?--Claude PIARD (talk) 17:15, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know (unless I am mistaken) and as mentioned, in French, under permission, on the file’s page → Alger FSGPF, it seems that the president (or an official member) of Fédération sportive et culturelle de France (FSCF) — which, historically speaking, is closely linked to Fédération gymnastique et sportive des patronages de France (FGSPF) — has personally sent a written email to permissions-commons, allowing the uploader to make use of all images relating to those two aforesaid federations via commons, considering that they are all originated from their private and historical archives.
euphonie breviary
18:59, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Hopefully, then, they can help clarify the following points:
  • Was the copyright of the photograph transferred from the photographer to the FSCF (by contract or by employer–employee status)?
  • If yes, the work should be in the public domain because of its publication date.
  • If no, the copyright status depends on when the photographer died, so we would need that information.
  • If the photographer died less than 70 years ago, we would need a licensing statement from the heirs. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, there seems to be no basis for your claim that the copyright holder has approved publication under the terms of the Free Art License. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, it seems to appears that the answer to the very first point you mention here → [1] would be yes, as also confirmed via this additional message → [2], which would mean that the copyright of the photograph was transferred from the photographer to the FSCF by employer–employee status. Hoping that this complementary information might help!
euphonie breviary
04:20, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
OTRS

Malgré au long silence qui fait suite à cette demande de suppression aux motifs contestés et par mesure de sécurité une demande OTRS a été renvoyée ce jour. Merci donc de bien vouloir en tenir compte et laisser ce fichier jusqu'au traîtement de celle-ci--Claude PIARD (talk) 14:52, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compte-tenu de la faiblesse reconnue de l'argumentation initiale de demande de suppression et de la demande OTRS en cours, y a-t-il lieu de maintenir le bandeau qui date maintenant de quatre mois--Claude PIARD (talk) 17:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On n'a toujours pas de confirmation de la demande OTRS, on ne cloture pas (en tout cas surtout pas en garder). --PierreSelim (talk) 16:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete There is nothing in the message at Commons talk:Deletion requests/File:Alger FSGPF.jpg that is helpful here. It names the source of the image without addressing at all the question of the photographer's copyright. It also gives permission only for Wikipedia, which is not sufficient to keep the image on Commons.

Although it was tagged with {{OTRS pending}} a month ago, no OTRS message has been received referring to this file.

So, we have a 1930 photograph taken by a known photographer whose date of death we do not know. Unless we can determine that he died before 1942, or determine definitely that the photographer transferred his copyright (this is unlikely), together with a valid license (not just for use in WP), then the image must be deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me)

Deleted: No evidence of permission or verifiablity of freedom of copyright Bastique ☎ appelez-moi! 05:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


La demande a bien été expédiée au mois de Janvier 2012. Et elle vient de vous être re-dirigée (en l'état) depuis cette suppression. Merci d'en tenir compte. Par ailleurs, ce document n'est pas une photographie d'auteur - ce qui aurait justifié l'argumentation ci-dessus - mais une page de revue contenant, entre autre, une photographie. Ce qui n'est pas la même chose chose en matière de droits d'auteurs, ceux-ci étant dévolus au directeur de publication ou à son successeur. Qui nous a donné expressement l'autorisation jointe en attaché à la demande OTRS. Je vous souhaite une très bonne journée.--Claude PIARD (talk) 09:45, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Alger_FSGPF.jpg&oldid=69659198"