Commons:Deletion requests/File:Catriona Gray 2019 stamp of the Philippines.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:Catriona Gray 2019 stamp of the Philippines.jpg

[edit]

Stamp is a derivative work of an official photoshoot by the Miss Universe Organization. The Philippine government doesn't hold the copyright of the photo nor the stamp. pandakekok9 13:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The original speedy deletion rationale given by Hogwarts Portal before it was removed by Taivo was: False license is given by the uploader. This image is not in public domain as cited. Also, no proper source is provided. This original portrait was an official photoshoot for Miss Universe, hence is copyrighted by the Miss Universe Organization. Source - [1] pandakekok9 04:50, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010: Please read my rationale again. The stamp is a DW of an official photoshoot by the Miss Universe Organization. The government didn't commission the work, therefore it doesn't own nor hold the copyright of the photo. If this file would be kept, evidence of permission from the Miss Universe Organization must be provided. pandakekok9 04:48, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The stamp itself is clearly public domain while the underlying work is copyrighted. The problem is that there are two different approaches that we as the community take when dealing with these. Sometimes we assume that the resultant work simply does not add extra copyright only the copyight of the original work exists. While in other cases we assume that although the underlying work is still copyrighted, we can use the public domain version of the stamp as long as we do not estract the copyrighted elements from them. Current state of the community concensus seems to be (but I may very well be incorrect) that we accept the public domain if the stampt is made in the same country as the original copyrighted work (see many stamps of Russia which have Russian films on them) but reject the media when the countries are different. With that said I will vote  Weak delete to express the apparent community standard on this issue. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 14:11, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deleted: This picture is taken and stolen from Miss Universe Instagram account, website and obviously not copyright-free. COM:NETCOPYVIO - obvious cases may use {{Copyvio}}. I Nyoman Gede Anila (talk) 23:05, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Which is why we should probably delete, but it also is obviously not an "obvious case". I would support warning and, upon repeating, de-admin to anybody who would delete file in this situation before a deletion request. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 16:36, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete because Commons:Derivative work. Also, take note of a provision at the Part IV, Chapter IV Sec. 176 of the copyright law (RA 8293) on the government works (not taking the new rules dating July 2020 into account). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:59, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

176.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, the Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest or otherwise; nor shall publication or republication by the government in a public document of any work in which copyright is subsisting be taken to cause any abridgment or annulment of the copyright or to authorize any use or appropriation of such work without the consent of the copyright owner. (Sec. 9, third par., P.D. No. 49)

  •  Info the newly-released Copyright Rules for the Government released by the IPOPHL in July 2020, taking effect from September, doesn't eaffect the essense of the copyright status on the Philippine government works, but strengthened the mandatory requirement of obtaining permission first from the relevant government departments /agencies /instrumentalities when one wants to used their works commercially, replacing "however" in the R.A. 8293 with "provided". The recently-conducted October 15, 2020 webinar of IPOPHL on copyright, joined by our fellow Pinoy Wikipedian Higad Rail Fan, has a Q&A Test via Google Forms, wherein one of the questions was "Since government works are not protected by copyright, no approval is needed for other entities to use their works commercially." The answer was "false". I cannot say if this can still be considered Commons:Non-copyright restriction as long accepted by much of the Commons community, even if this reinforced restriction on reuse might fail both Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses (third criterium: commercial reuse) and Commons:PCP. Everyone is invited to state their inputs at Template talk:PD-PhilippinesGov, relevant sections "New "Copyright Rules for the Government" released by IPOPHIL" and "Not copyrighted but no approval for commercial purposes not OK." JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.)

Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 04:24, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Catriona_Gray_2019_stamp_of_the_Philippines.jpg&oldid=767309727"