Commons:Deletion requests/File:Orrego executioner tattoo.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.
While I'm sure the original court case was in the public domain, the tattoo itself is likely copyrighted by the creator. Should be moved to the English Wikipedia after deletion as it qualifies for fair use and is used there. Chess (User talk:Chess) Please ping when replying. 00:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Emphatic Keep. While the original design or plan of the tattoo itself may be copyrighted, this photograph of the execution of that tattoo (pun intended) entered the public domain when it was placed in the public record by Glickman and Glickman in Taylor v. Cnty. of L.A.. Similarly, while you may be able to copyright your own image and likeness, you cannot prevent someone from taking a photo of you on the street and selling it to a newspaper. The subject has no rights to the photo. It's a distinct immovable medium and thus could have been independently copyrighted had it not entered the public domain. Indeed, celebrities often copyright their own image, but they do not own universal copyright to images of their face (e.g. Paparazzi) [1] [2] [3]. They only own things such as reproductions of their likeness, etc. It's not just a fair use, it's a distinct copyright situation. Further e.g. Sandoval v New Line Cinema (973 F. Supp. 409 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)) This is still an evolving area of copyright, but some precedents do exist.Shibbolethink (talk) 02:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 16:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
