Commons:Deletion requests/File:Early Chinese bodybuilding.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.
Image is likely not PD in the US owing to the URAA. If this was first published in the 1950s, copyright would have expired in the 2000s; as such, the 1996 URAA would have extended copyright in the US. To be adequately free for Commons, images need to be in the PD in both the US and the source country. This one is (seemingly) free in China, but not free in the US. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:38, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per the reasons above. I have recently been nominating a number of uploads by Kingoflettuce and Zanhe for deletion, which were kept despite it not being public domain in the US. Doesn't look like Commons actually has a unified policy on the matter, so I've just resorted to tagging such uploads with Template:Not-PD-US-URAA instead. Jolly Janner (talk) 04:24, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Keep Per prevailing consensus reached at Commons:Massive restoration of deleted images by the URAA: "URAA cannot be used as the sole reason for deletion". -Zanhe (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Zanhe, I'm not sure why you continue to cite an individual archived discussion from two years ago rather than the current policy that was modified as a result of the discussion. The actual policy gives a different view on the matter i.e. if " there is significant doubt about the freedom of a file under US or local law, the file must be deleted". Jolly Janner (talk) 20:00, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Agree, the current policy (which has greater weight in this deletion nomination than the discussion which led to changes) is much more restricted. "Files nominated for deletion due to the URAA should be evaluated carefully .... A mere allegation (emphasis in original) that the URAA applies to a file cannot be the sole reason for deletion. If the end result of copyright evaluation is that there is significant doubt about the freedom of a file under US or local law, the file must be deleted in line with the precautionary principle." Unless the Chinese copyright law before the URAA was significantly different (say, 25 years post publication), anything Chinese-published from the 1950s would definitely have been affected. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Background on the change to policy is available here. Following this discussion, policy was changed again, with tighter wording following soon after. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:47, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- PS, a batch of about five files that I nominated for deletion under the same circumstances has just been kept by User:Ronhjones. It seems as though there are at least two sysops who are against using URAA to delete files. Maybe consensus has changed somewhere else but the main policy page hasn't been updated or ammended accordingly? Jolly Janner (talk) 00:39, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Kept: non-USA work. --Jcb (talk) 20:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
