Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hohenzollern Typ Schlägel Aufnahme 1936.png
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 unknown source. 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. 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. Uoijm77 (talk) 13:12, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Keep Foto ist 1936 entstanden. Rainerhaufe (talk) 13:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
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) 13:24, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Falsch. Der Veröffentlicher hat ein Foto verwendet was heute gemeinfrei ist.Rainerhaufe (talk) 10:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- An incomprehensible argument. Conjuring reality is pointless. Respecting copyright is not about making claims without evidence. No one can ever immediately assume that a photo was published immediately after it was taken. Uoijm77 (talk) 11:59, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Die Aufnahme stammt aber aus dem Jahr 1936 und da hat man solche Aufnahmen nur erstellt, wenn man auch einen Zweck dafür hatte. Außerdem handelt es sich lediglich um Scans vom Buch. Der Urheber heutzutage hat andere Möglichkeiten mit dem Scannen vom Negativ das bringt viel bessere Abbildungen.Rainerhaufe (talk) 11:31, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete The photo is a copyright infringement. All explanations are provided at the beginning of the discussion. This picture is not in the public domain. Uoijm77 (talk) 09:19, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep ein Foto was vor 1945 entstanden ist, als das Fotografieren von Eisenbahnanlagen verboten war, von einem unbekannten Fotografen, ist keine Urheberrechtsverletzung. Es ist daher gemeinfrei. Rainerhaufe (talk) 08:37, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- Die Aufnahme stammt aber aus dem Jahr 1936 und da hat man solche Aufnahmen nur erstellt, wenn man auch einen Zweck dafür hatte. Außerdem handelt es sich lediglich um Scans vom Buch. Der Urheber heutzutage hat andere Möglichkeiten mit dem Scannen vom Negativ das bringt viel bessere Abbildungen.Rainerhaufe (talk) 11:31, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- An incomprehensible argument. Conjuring reality is pointless. Respecting copyright is not about making claims without evidence. No one can ever immediately assume that a photo was published immediately after it was taken. Uoijm77 (talk) 11:59, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Evidence missing that this photograph was published early enough, unknown publication date/source - COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 17:26, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
