Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cocteau-twins-31011985-i-n-3-91713.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.
Copyright violation. The original version of that photo is available on https://asset.museum-digital.org/berlin/images/202012/cocteau-twins-31011985-i-n-3-91713.jpg The photographer Petra Gall has died in 2018 Blutgretchen (talk) 11:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Follow this Link to the complete series of photos by Petra Gall on the original web source: [1] --Blutgretchen (talk) 11:23, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Petra Galls collection was donated to the Schwules Museum, six years before her death.Skivsamlare (talk) 11:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- In Germany, copyright as a right in itself is neither transferable nor can it be donated. So Petra might have given the permission to the Schwules Museeum to use and show her work, but not more. You uploaded the file with a CC license that says there is no copyright. --Blutgretchen (talk) 12:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- The source page cites the image as CC0, but as you suggest, it might be incorrect. Blåmes (talk) 21:11, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- In Germany, copyright as a right in itself is neither transferable nor can it be donated. So Petra might have given the permission to the Schwules Museeum to use and show her work, but not more. You uploaded the file with a CC license that says there is no copyright. --Blutgretchen (talk) 12:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Petra Galls collection was donated to the Schwules Museum, six years before her death.Skivsamlare (talk) 11:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- OK. After a thorough check of the website Collection Fotosammlung (Schwules Museum) it looks as if all the photos there are actually public domain, because if you scroll down the page for each individual photo there is the Usage and citation part, where information for citation is given and the licence CC0 1.0. But an important part of CC0 is the to-the-extent-allowed-by-law-statement. Under German law, copyright cannot be waived completely. And if you check what is directly written below each individual photo, you find the actual copyright information "Provenance/Rights: Rita Maier / Schwules Museum Berlin [>>> RR-P]" If you click on that last part [>>> RR-P], you find the actual copyright note for that photo: Rights Reserved - Paid Access. --Blutgretchen (talk) 21:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Could you provide a source for the statement "Under German law, copyright cannot be waived completely"? Does this mean that CC0 1.0 is incompatible with German law? However, the RR-P bit is confusing. I have contacted Schwules Museum and asked them to clarify the license. Blåmes (talk) 09:02, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- You cannot compare German copyright law with laws in other coutries. It's an authors law more than a copyright law: German Urheberrechtsgesetz (UrhG):[2]. § 7 Author: The author is the creator of the work. Most important part after the authors death is Abschnitt 5 ([3]). §28,29,30 regulate the legal succession. The following part (Unterabschnitt 2) regulates the rights of use. The author (or his legal) can only grant rights of use. So it is either the author or his legal sucessor until 70 years after the authors death who have the rights to stipulate, how the creation can be used. The law does not provide that copyright can be waived. All stays with author or legal sucessor. --Blutgretchen (talk) 09:40, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Could you provide a source for the statement "Under German law, copyright cannot be waived completely"? Does this mean that CC0 1.0 is incompatible with German law? However, the RR-P bit is confusing. I have contacted Schwules Museum and asked them to clarify the license. Blåmes (talk) 09:02, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe this helps:[4] --Blutgretchen (talk) 09:43, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
The Schwules Museum has not replied to my request for clarification about the license, and I therefor support a deletion of this image. Blåmes (talk) 20:07, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:51, 14 November 2021 (UTC)