Commons:Deletion requests/File:DR 99 4711.png

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:DR 99 4711.png

[edit]

This file may meet the criteria for speedy deletion. This file is a copyright violation because it is copyrighted and not published under a free license. The file is subject to speedy deletion unless it is relicensed according to the Commons licensing policy. This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: It is not known when it was published. Licence is invalid. No evidence that the author died 70 years ago. Photo scanned from book published in 1995. Please refer to Commons:Publication. There is no evidence that it was published 70 years ago. There are many indications that this is a photograph taken by a private person. Please refer to Commons:Project scope/Evidence. The uploader failed to prove that the photo was published over 70 years ago. This is not factory photography. All content in the book is copyrighted by the publisher. Respecting copyright is not about making claims without evidence. It never means that someone can scan a photo from a book and a recipe that they introduce shortly after creating it. The photo comes from a private collection with a high probability. There are no signs that this is a promotional photo. Many such photos were kept in private archival collections. Copyright should not be implied. This should be based on unequivocal evidence. No one can ever immediately assume that a photo was published immediately after it was taken. This can never be an arbitrary decision by one editor. This file is a copyright violation because it comes from - Manfred Weisbrod, Hans Wiegard, Hans Müller, Wolfgang Petznick, "Deutsches Lok-Archiv. Dampflokomotiven", Transpress, Berlin, 1995, ISBN 3-344-70903-8. Uoijm77 (talk) 10:56, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Bild ist 1950 entstanden. Rainerhaufe (talk) 12:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete The date the photo was taken doesn't matter. The date of publication of the photo is more important. There is no evidence that it was published 70 years ago. Uoijm77 (talk) 12:52, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bildautor: Klaus Kieper. +2018. Köhl1 (talk) 14:43, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Republishing an historic image doesn't transfer the copyright, or restart the copyright clock. --RAN (talk) 21:25, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete This is not a republishing an historic photo. The only case of publishing an picture is a mentioned book. This photo probably comes from private collections. Therefore, it was probably published for the first time in this book. There is no evidence that the picture was published even earlier. One of the participants in the discussion pointed out that the author of the photograph died in 2018. Uoijm77 (talk) 07:18, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete Because this unquestionably was not public domain in Germany in 1996. URAA applies. 1995 was probably not the first publication of this photograph. Abzeronow (talk) 16:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is no evidence that the photo was published earlier than the book. Many such photos were kept in private archival collections. Uoijm77 (talk) 08:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If this were a negative, I might agree with that. If this was a photographic print, then it would have been published around creation, and copies could have been disseminated to railfans who wanted a photograph of this locomotive. Maybe the uploader could tell us if this book cited said "private collection" or not. Abzeronow (talk) 16:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect allegation. Denying reality is pointless. One of the participants in the discussion pointed out that the author of the photograph recently died. Copyright law is not about making assumptions. There is no unequivocal evidence that the photograph was published earlier than the aforementioned book. No further discussion of copyright is necessary. Uoijm77 (talk) 13:07, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete Per the nominator. There's zero evidence that the image was published before it was featured in the book and as the nominator says a lot of times rare photographs are kept in private collections and aren't printed anywhere to make them more collectable. Especially ones having to do with trains and I say that as a collector myself. There's plenty of photographs in my collection that have never printed anywhere else, including the internet. Except for the Ebay listing that I bought the images from and I paid a pretty good premium for the privilege. That's just the nature of the thing. Often times extremely rare images are horded by people who want to publish books about the topic of the images to. So the odd's are good that the image wasn't published anywhere else, at least without actual evidence to the contrary. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Evidence missing that this photograph was published early enough. Given publication date is 1995. --Wdwd (talk) 17:06, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:DR_99_4711.png&oldid=751707535"