Commons:Deletion requests/File:Arattupuzha Pooram views IMG 2949.JPG
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.
Light decoration is copyrighted. Kiran Gopi (Talk to me..) 06:26, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Wiki link please. "Light decoration" എന്ന് സെർച്ചിയാൽ തന്നെ ധാരാളം ചിത്രങ്ങൾ കിട്ടുന്നുണ്ടല്ലോ കോമൺസിൽ! --കുമാര് വൈക്കം (talk) 09:15, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- If these decoration are entirely your work you can release it under free license. But here it is not falling in that category, so we have to consider it as Derivative work.--Kiran Gopi (Talk to me..) 09:32, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- Oh thanks! If so, the same applies to the images uploaded by you as well, for eg: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NSS_Logo_Puliyannoor.JPG (Derivative work, In india FOP is not applicable for 2d works.) നിയമങ്ങൾ അറിയുന്ന താങ്കൾ അതൊന്ന് ഡിലിറ്റ് ചെയ്തേക്കാമോ? I will initiate the deletion process.--കുമാര് വൈക്കം (talk) 09:51, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- If these decoration are entirely your work you can release it under free license. But here it is not falling in that category, so we have to consider it as Derivative work.--Kiran Gopi (Talk to me..) 09:32, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- As a commons admin, I expect you to be more specific while giving a deletion reason. Please elaborate the term "these decoration" in your previous comment. You mean to cover "all the decoration using lights", like in this category ["Light Decorations"]? If not, please start the undeletion process --കുമാര് വൈക്കം (talk) 06:31, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- The light decoration is not at all a permanent one(FOP is applicable only if it is in a permanent place), it has been made as part of the pooram and the copyright of these decorations obviously belongs to the artist who made this decoration.--Kiran Gopi (Talk to me..) 03:59, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Delete Kiran Gopi's analysis is sound. FOP is not applicable because the work is not permanently installed (and it's questionable whether it applies to light displays at all which are only lit at some times and not others). The work is copyrightable, since it has a spark of creativity that extends beyond merely the shape of the building, to include specific creative choices about color and lines (such as the colored diagonal lines across the posts). This is a derivative work of the light display, and without a license statement from its designer, we cannot retain it. I am disappointed that User:Sivavkm as an admin is making rash generalizations above - not all light displays are creative enough to be copyrightable, so it is natural that some such images are okay for us to use. Dcoetzee (talk) 11:30, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Keep All I see is running lights kept around the edges of the building. I do not think it is creative enough to claim copyright. The copyright should belong to the building architect, which then converts to FOP. Hence I vote to keep. --Sreejith K (talk) 15:10, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Why wouldn't Template:FoP-India apply here? Bolting a heap of lights to a building seems to satisfy "the making or publishing of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of a sculpture, or other artistic work failing under sub-clause (iii) of clause (c) of section 2 ["any other work of artistic craftsmanship"], if such work is permanently situate in a public place or any premises to which the public has access;" to me. Permanence isn't mentioned in Template:FoP-India, further the light display is clearly 3D and very public. Or am I missing something? Liamdavies (talk) 12:10, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Though the image is freely licensed, it is a derivative of a 3D artistic work that is exhibited publically only temporarily, and so not subject to FOP. James F. (talk) 22:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
