Commons:Deletion requests/File:Louis Néel 1970b.jpg

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.
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.

Not created in Italy but Paris, France. Any proof that it has been first published in Italy so any reason for Italian law to apply. Patrick Rogel (talk) 17:54, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep. This is a real photograph with the photo agency stamp on its back. Printing such photographs can be assumed as publication, and the stamp says this was done in Milan. Also note the lack of copyright notice on the back, which complies with {{PD-1996}}. Materialscientist (talk) 06:58, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

* Delete I dont't agree : a photoprint from a negative is not a publication even if several copies of it have been printed. In addition evoking PD-1996 is irrelevant here since prior being public domain in the U.S. the photo should be public domain in the country of origin. The question is : is this file public domain in Italy and why ? --Patrick Rogel (talk) 14:14, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • See Commons:Publication: the distribution of copies .. of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending. This is exactly what is implied by the backside of this photo. Note that this (US mostly) definition of publication has been widely accepted on Commons. Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. We can assume that this printed copy has been issued with the consent of the author, according to the Berne Convention. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:13, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per discussion. Ruthven (msg) 12:59, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion. Ruthven (msg) 13:03, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]