Commons:Deletion requests/File:Scott Pilgrim vs. The World signed Blu Ray! (5168132961).jpg

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:Scott Pilgrim vs. The World signed Blu Ray! (5168132961).jpg

Derivative of a copyright work — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Question: There are lots of DVD, music albums, poster photos on commons. I saw a few today, even, where they were definitely the focus of the photo. Are only some acceptable? Are you going to delete them all? Or can we also see that this image, more than others, is looking at the fact it's covered in signatures and representing a different format of home media release, so it's not actually looking at the cover art, which is hard to see anyway. (For that reason also, I say keep.) Kingsif (talk) 06:55, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

 Delete @Kingsif: I have looked through the respective categories for the types of files you mention and all of them either had an OTRS notice in the permission field, were published under a free license by the copyright holder elsewhere or the artwork was too simple (only text or basic shapes) for copyright to apply. All others should likely be deleted, yes. The cover art is not hard to see, only some details are obscured. The entire character cast and the background would have to be covered, leaving only the original text, signatures and the combo pack sticker for it to be OK for Commons without a permission from the author.--TFerenczy (talk) 09:38, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@TFerenczy: thanks for your input; since the cover art is (IMO, based on the other functions of the image) not the focus and not massively in focus, is it covered by any part of de minimis? I also feel there's some grounds for this deletion request to be closed no matter what because of JJ assuming bad faith – I've noticed over the past year or so, JJ seems to be following my image uploads actively looking for things to delete. I know they run the bot that reduces files, but before this past year, JJ themself hasn't been watching what I do. You could then prod it yourself. Kingsif (talk) 16:20, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Kingsif: I am afraid de-minimis doesn't apply here, it is rather strict. The covers would probably be de-minimis if, for example, the Flickr uploader took a picture of one of the actors holding them from 10 feet away – the items would still be recognizable, and you could probably make out the signatures but not much of the copyrighted material. Even some other images from the same album (like this one), where the cover is even less in focus, could be problematic.--TFerenczy (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Now that I've mentioned it, JJMC89 - I have noticed this behavior mentioned where only over the past year or so (not before) you seem to be watching my uploads specifically wanting to delete things I upload. I don't like it. I assume it's because you've identified me as a bad uploader or something (obviously not true anymore) and want to keep things clean, but every time I see you (not the bot) tagging my uploads and stuff (half the time for half-baked reasons that even you don't dispute when I remove), it feels intrusive, so I'd rather you didn't. Leave it to other users to notice, as and when they might see it, rather than constantly look over my shoulder. I'm not saying keep all the bad files I upload (obviously), but I'd rather you didn't just assume everything I upload will be bad (how I feel from your actions). I'm not making personal attacks, I'm trying to openly approach an editing behavior that's making me not want to be involved on commons, as it makes me feel negatively targeted. Kingsif (talk) 16:20, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

---

Deleted: per nomination: copyrighted CD cover. Ruthven (msg) 12:37, 1 April 2020 (UTC)