Commons:Deletion requests/File:Padova - Casa Canonicale del Petrarca P1766.jpg

File:Padova - Casa Canonicale del Petrarca P1766.jpg

no FOP in Italy Krd 19:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

that is house, he lived in 1300 GioviPen ^{GP msg} 19:16, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

The question is about the information panel, not the house. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

ok (for copyright i suppose @Ikan Kekek) . but the reason is nosense GioviPen ^{GP msg} 09:54, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

but the municipality has authorized the use in cc-by-sa (from the official website https://www.padovanet.it/) GioviPen ^{GP msg} 09:59, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@GiovanniPen The authorization is here and it clearly IMHO authorizes only photos of the "monument" (out of copyright, but the authorization is necessary because of the non copyright restrictions that Italy has on cultural objects), not also of information panels and any other modern thing. Friniate (talk) 10:23, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Friniate leggo "monumenti/opere di nostra proprietà ... esterni ed interni"

il cartello non è un'opera di loro proprietà relativa al monumento? quindi dovrebbe essere autorizzata (?)

non so, vorrei capire. grazie GioviPen ^{GP msg} 10:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Mi sembra una forzatura considerarla valida anche per i pannelli. L'autorizzazione elenca in modo preciso i monumenti e le opere autorizzate, e tra di essi non vengono inseriti i pannelli informativi. Friniate (talk) 10:43, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

That makes sense. I'd like to say that it's logical that we shouldn't assume informational panels are covered by the authorization, but I don't know if it's good Italian to say "Non e' logico che si puo' assumere ch'il cartello sia autorizatta." I think I'm missing at least a congionctivo form for potere. Posse? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I understand, thanks also to @Ikan Kekek (si può possa assumere che il cartello sia autorizzato).

maybe I was wrong, but I considered that the panel was covered, assuming that is an artifact made by (and property of) the municipality [è presente il logo del comune ed è una struttura permanente, direi considerabile parte del monumento perché non avrebbe motivo di esistere senza il monumento] and the authorization says both "monumenti/opere". GioviPen ^{GP msg} 12:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, I think that NOFOP here doesn't apply for several reasons. First the sign itself can not be considered an artwork covered by the italian law, additionally it was done on request of a public authority hence it was paid with public money and according to italian law what is paid with public money is public.--Ysogo (talk) 17:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Ysogo The text is under copyright and so are the photos. You can certainly argue that they were probably made by a public administration (you'd need some evidence though) and that therefore they fell under PD-ItalyGov after 20 years, but they would still be copyrighted in the US anyway, since it looks like the panel was made after 1976. Friniate (talk) 19:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

IMHO as I said the evidence is that there is the municipality’s logo and there are no other informations like header or footer (or little border write)…

moreover is a permanent structure so it cannot be placed to anyone else except the local authority GioviPen ^{GP msg} 18:33, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Anche quando il cartello sia stato realizzato da qualcun altro, come è probabile, è per opera del Comune. Quindi gli eventuali diritti (qualora si vogliano considerare, quale che sia sul testo etc) vengono rilasciati al Comune che ha autorizzato l’uso per Commons, specificando gli indirizzi stradali, i monumenti/opere e sia interni che esterni. idk GioviPen ^{GP msg} 18:38, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@GiovanniPen As i said (in italian, now I write it in english), your interpretation that the authorization covers also the panels could be plausible, but I think it could be a bit of a stretch to include them among the "interior" of the monument. What is sure is that that text is not in PD in the US though, that is out of discussion. At best it is in CC-BY-SA because of the authorization. Friniate (talk) 15:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

yes, ok. is clear the PD-US. from the italian side is "interpretabile", i'll contact the Municipality to avoid any doubt. GioviPen ^{GP msg} 17:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)