Commons:Deletion requests/File:Royal Observer Corps Ensign.PNG

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:Royal_Observer_Corps_Ensign.PNG

The given source's request for attribution is not a license; it is only a request for attribution. The source never explicitly gives the reader the right to copy (nor states under which circumstances it is OK); it only says "if you do copy, then please acknowledge." My guess is this would not hold up in a court of law. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I will be curious to see Endrick Shellcoat's (the author) response but suspect he may be on vacation (he has not edited for a couple of weeks - which is unusual for him). I cannot imagine he had any intention of limiting use in any way of the png image when he created it. What change in the licence wording would you suggest in this instance? 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think Endrick is the primary author - Royal Observer Corps Association is. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:31, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

No Endrick built and authored the ensign PNG - all he obtained from ROCA's website was the gold crest element that he inserted into the fly of the ensign during the image build. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 12:51, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

That gold crust element may be the only part of the image which isn't {{PD-ineligible}}. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:25, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The gold crest element is copied from a site which states "Please acknowledge the site and the author when copying anything from these pages". I'm no solicitor, but I'm confused as to why this statement should be problematic. The site does not indicate any restriction whatsoever in copying, nor what type of copying is or is not permitted. My counter is that if any restriction applies then it falls upon the copyright holder (the site in this case) to specify any/all types of restriction which apply. In the absence of such, it is reasonable to assume that ANY and ALL forms of copying are permitted, provided that site/author receives due attribution. I can't see the problem here to be honest, and a "my guess is this would not hold up in a court of law" doesn't convince me of your expertise in this field either I'm afraid. Regards Endrick Shellycoat (talk) 12:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

 Delete I disagree. In general, the creator owns the copyright. He or she may license it for use by others, but the license extends only as far as it specifically states. Thus a request for attribution is no license at all, or, at most, one that requires attribution and does not allow either commercial use or modification.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:42, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Well in this instance the creator of the original crest image in question was the Headquarters Royal Observer Corps civilian draughtsman who created the image in 1941 when the Corps was granted Royal status - which was 70 years ago and as such is now well out of copyright under English law. So where does that leave us? All of the individual elements are copyright free and Endrick Shelleycoat as the creator of a completely new image is free to allocate any licence he wishes. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 11:38, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

There's no question that the original design is PD -- the Crown Copyright lasts only fifty years and the flag was in use well before 1961. However, it is well established that with respect to Coats of Arms that each realization of the CoA has a copyright, so unless the ROCA copied an earlier realization, their version has its own copyright which we must respect. Hence my delete opinion above. With that said, it should be easy to get OTRS permission from ROCA.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:46, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I very much doubt that ROCA have any ability to generate their own realisation of the CoA and will have simply copied the original. I have emailed ROCA and directed them to this discussion. We will await their comment ... but for a novice's benefit what does OTRS mean? 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 14:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

As an aside, from my time on the HQROC staff, I have in my memorabilia drawer a colour photocopy of the original draughtsman's submission to the Palace of the ROC Crest (which also bears King George's approval signature) and that is definitely out of copyright. If 'OTRS' approval is not eventually forthcoming from ROCA then Endrick can use that artwork to recreate the Ensign.png. But as they are identical in appearance that would seem to be a bit of a nonsense for a historical organisation that has been defunct for over 20 years. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 14:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Much of copyright depends on very fine points -- almost silly, in some cases -- so if you could upload a good scan of your original, that would be a great solution of the problem. It would also be an interesting image in its own right, with the King George's signature on it.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:34, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Much of this is lost on me, to be honest. However, if 21stCenturyGreenstuff can upload a copy of the original image (both with and without signature) then at least that'd be a start. (It would of course display the 'King's Crown'). I've also sent a request to Sodacan, one of Wiki's most accomplished .SVG graphic design artists, to request he do a version of the badge(s) shown here: https://www.fotw.info/flags/gb%5Eroc.html . If, for the sake of the article, replacements could be in place prior to any deletion of existing images then that would be appreciated. As I am also, along with 21stCenturyGreenstuff, a member of the organisation whose web-page image is currently used, I know that it would be a cold day in hell before anyone associated with the ROC Association: i) objected ii) resorted to legal action against Wiki for using the image on the article. (The Wiki ROC article was even mentioned in a ROC Association publication, in which 21stCenturyGreenstuff was himself a contributor). I hope that Sodacan can perform his magic and look forward to any upload 21stCenturyGreenstuff can provide. Endrick Shellycoat (talk) 17:01, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

If it's easier, by all means get permission from the ROC Association, using the procedure at Commons:OTRS, as that would also solve the problem.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:26, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

---

Deleted. FASTILY ^(TALK) 02:18, 13 September 2011 (UTC)