Commons:Deletion requests/File:Devadatta attacking Buddha.jpg
may be copyright Napoleon 100 (talk) 12:20, 7 July 2012 (UTC) Delete Derivative work. No Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Laos. The artist is the copyright holder. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Paintings on monastery walls are collective religious anonymous work. Don't Delete. Dom (talk) 14:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- They are not anonymous. The user has uploaded many similar images. One of them, File:Buddha_with_Angulimala.jpg have a sign and date as 20.9.93/8. Another similar image with the sign was deleted recently Commons:Deletion requests/File:Buddha with gods.jpg. All of the works are derivatives. There is no evidence that the artist has given consent for this derivative. This warrants a mass deletion of all images uploaded by the user. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:20, 7 July 2012 (UTC)Modified date/added a missing no.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 18:42, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Mmm… I see you can read lao and are a professional in lao intellectual property! As for your rationale: one possible infringement should trigger mass deletion, this is just unacceptable. Be careful not to kill Wikipedia by being overzelous! You did not convince me Don't Delete Dom (talk) 14:43, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- I am not an expert, however can read an English intellectual property doc from here. Also, considering all files seem to be style/work of the same artist. Sign is not visible in all photos. If the artist has not given consent for the derivative (No proof of consent), "The term of protection of copyrights begins from the date of creation of works and subsists for the life of the author plus 50 years as from the death of the mentioned author of works." The date seems to be Arabic numerals, not Lao numerals. (while 9 can be a Lao 1, 0 is a Lao 0, no similar Lao numerals to the Arabic 2, 3, 8) Thus, the originals are copyrighted. They need to deleted per Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 18:42, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: DW, no evidence of permission. Even "collective religious anonymous work" has a copyright which we must respect. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:23, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
