Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bartfield.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.
It might be arguable that a combination of Garfield and Bart Simpson technically cannot be freely licensed, because it relies on the copyright of both. Beyond that, however, as this was taken in the US, as far as I know street art if it was made before 1989, can be considered copyright of the artist in its own right. PseudoSkull (talk) 14:19, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- A point of clarification. This photo was not taken in the US. As the descriptions states, it was taken in Barcelona, Spain in May 2018. Ckoerner (talk) 15:46, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Keep False nomination. This is Spain, not the US, and Spanish law applies, not US. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:31, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- I apologize for not seeing the art was drawn in Spain, however it doesn't make much of a difference if US law is different from Spain's. @Andy Dingley: How does US law not also apply? I thought it was law here that the item be PD in the US as well, because the WMF is hosted in the US. PseudoSkull (talk) 00:01, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Andy Dingley: Furthermore, Bart Simpson and Garfield are both US-originating properties. I find it unbelievable how to all these deletion requests I've created, no one has addressed the fact that these are all derivative works of copyrighted character art. And that is the main point I make. Freedom of panorama doesn't begin to address the main concern here. PseudoSkull (talk) 00:06, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- This is in Spain, where FoP would cover a graphic work such as this. The point of FoP is that it doesn't matter if the work is under copyright, the fact that it's accessible to panorama (i.e. usually because it has been placed in position such that it's publicly accessible) means that we're OK to use it. If you want to claim that such an image then becomes subject to copyright in the US, if you upload a Spanish image to the US – then that's one hell of a land-grab. If US law is supporting such a thing, then (like trying to host kpop fansites in China after today), it's time to consider moving those servers.
- Has the author of this graffiti imposed upon the IP of the original Garfield / Simpson holders? Possibly so, but we still have to consider fair use and parody, which is the whole point of that work. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:58, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Andy Dingley: Furthermore, Bart Simpson and Garfield are both US-originating properties. I find it unbelievable how to all these deletion requests I've created, no one has addressed the fact that these are all derivative works of copyrighted character art. And that is the main point I make. Freedom of panorama doesn't begin to address the main concern here. PseudoSkull (talk) 00:06, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- I apologize for not seeing the art was drawn in Spain, however it doesn't make much of a difference if US law is different from Spain's. @Andy Dingley: How does US law not also apply? I thought it was law here that the item be PD in the US as well, because the WMF is hosted in the US. PseudoSkull (talk) 00:01, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Andy Dingley: As far as I can understand, freedom of panorama is only about an image taken of a permanently displayed object. But could the permanently displayed object not itself be an act of copyright infringement? For example, painting a reproduction of Garfield on a wall in New York City, would that not be a technical copyright infringement on the graffiti artist's part? So, this isn't just a case of "we took a picture of graffiti art that was original IP of the artist", more like "we took a picture of graffiti art that was based directly on independently copyrighted character designs". The cycle: Copyrighted character -> Graffiti art depicting copyrighted character -> Photo of graffiti art depicting copyrighted character. Is the copyright of the character in this cycle at any point void? PseudoSkull (talk) 01:55, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- Also fair use is not allowed at Commons, see Commons:FU (I can't believe this is the actual shortcut lmao). PseudoSkull (talk) 01:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Per Andy Dingley, {{Non-free graffiti}} applies, @PseudoSkull: don't you think so?! --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:33, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Kept per discussion -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 23:22, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
