Commons:Deletion requests/File:Précilhon (Pyr-Atl, Fr) Mairie.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.

File:Précilhon_(Pyr-Atl,_Fr)_Mairie.JPG

[edit]

Recent architecture (town halls, a school); no COM:FOP#France. Pieter Kuiper (talk) 17:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These 4 are rather ordinary-looking buildings. I, the uploader, have asked for such DR's as exemples to come to a discussion about how far reaches the no COM:FOP#France. It may help me for future uploads of pictures of buildings in France. Please do not hesitate to comment on these requests. --Havang(nl) (talk) 16:13, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted.

My French is not good enough for subtleties, so it is possible that I have missed something, but the French law is:

Article L112-2: Sont considérés notamment comme oeuvres de l'esprit au sens du présent code:
(7) Les oeuvres de dessin, de peinture, d'architecture, de sculpture, de gravure, de lithographie ; [1]
Article L112-2: The following, in particular, shall be considered works of the mind within the meaning of this Code:
(7) works of drawing, painting, architecture, sculpture, engraving and lithography;

I see nothing which says that "ordinary-looking" architecture is not protected, so I believe that we cannot have an image of any building built in France which was designed by an architect who died after 1939.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please, if you enter an argument, do not close before end of discussion. Commons:Licensing mentions "The architect of a notable building". Also File:Ledeuix (Pyr-Atl, Fr) fronton, école.JPG is an overall view including the school, which also needs discussion. --Havang(nl) (talk) 15:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have reopened this discussion. However, I have answered the only question that you asked above -- how far does the lack of FOP go? Since the actual law says nothing about "notable" and the court cases cited at Commons:Licensing do not require it, Commons:Licensing is probably wrong to use the word. Certainly the actual law is more important than what is said on Commons, is it not?
As for File:Ledeuix (Pyr-Atl, Fr) fronton, école.JPG, it is, indeed, an overall view of the school. Why would an overall view of the building not be copyrighted? It occupies the vast bulk of the image space, so it is certainly not de minimis.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File:Remigny (Saône-et-Loire, Fr) mairie.JPG is similar to these. Of course, it would seem unlikely that the architect would sue if someone put this image on a website. But he might feel entitled to royalties from a local postcard publisher. And the law is clear, the publisher would to pay up, there would be no reason to take this to court. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for continuing a bit the discussion. I am notably interested in the interpretation of the Ledieux file which I took with the pelota wall of a form seen in about all basque villages, see Category:Pelota courts in Pyrénées-Atlantiques and often on school playgrounds, and with just a part of the school itselves. Is the image as such allowed, or only a cropped version containing the pelota wall or nothing of it? --Havang(nl) (talk) 17:00, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I had to look up the expression, it was not in my nl-en dictionary. I found it: Threshold of originality. Is this a valid criterium, and if so, how to use it? Could it be that Commons:Licensing is not completely wrong in talking about "Notable building". --Havang(nl) (talk) 19:39, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would not object to an image showing only the wall, with the rest of the building cropped out, but it would not be very interesting.
I can say with complete certainty that these buildings would easily pass the threshold of originality in the United States. Here, architects publish books of plans of houses and other small buildings that are very simple by any standard and enforce copyright against anyone who might try to build one without paying the appropriate fee. I can not speak with any authority about the threshold in France, but in the absence of evidence that the standard there is much higher, I think our precautionary principle controls.
Also note that the examples at Threshold of originality are very simple designs -- nowhere near the complexity of even a simple building. Also, reading the similar article at WP:EN suggests that the threshold is lower in Europe than the US, not higher.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:26, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Précilhon_(Pyr-Atl,_Fr)_Mairie.JPG&oldid=79016957"