Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tow Mater Disney On Ice Cars @ Bell Centre.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.
It's unlikely photographer has the rights to the "Tow Mater" character from Pixar's "Cars" movie, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MaterCars.jpg for the fair use statement on en:Wiki. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
- You're assuming that they need the rights. The "fair use" example on en.wikipedia certainly isn't likely to be free, but that's a Disney-made and supplied two dimensional image- not the same as this one.
- That said, I suspect that this *isn't* covered by Canadian freedom of panorama laws. Those allow photographs of *3D* works of art permanently located in a public place, but- of course- this isn't permanently located, and I don't know whether the "Bell Centre" counts as a public place under Canadian law.
- Nevertheless, it's not as simple as your argument makes out.
- Can anyone with more experience and inclination to get involved with Canadian FOP et al shed any further light on this? Ubcule (talk) 18:41, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Comment Everything Disney is (c), including Disney on ice http://www.disneyonice.com/overview. Disney created the characters which are on the ice, the photographer didn't. Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:16, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
- I'm well aware of that, and didn't claim otherwise. The point being made is that the fact that X owns the copyright on a 3D work of at doesn't automatically make 2D reproductions of them a copyright violation.
- Under [Canadian Copyright] it is not an infringement of copyright for any person to reproduce, in a painting, drawing, engraving, photograph or cinematographic work … (i) an architectural work (defined as any building or structure or any model of a building or structure"); or (ii) "a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship or a cast or model of a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship, that is permanently situated in a public place or building".
- I don't think that applies here because the "3D work of art" (i.e. the Mater car) isn't "permanently situated"- by any reasonable definition- where the photograph was taken. But my point is that even though, yes, it's safe to assume any Disney property is copyrighted up to its ears, this doesn't imply that any and all photographic reproductions of such 3D works are *always* going to be copyvios (which seemed to be what you were saying).
- I'm well aware of that, and didn't claim otherwise. The point being made is that the fact that X owns the copyright on a 3D work of at doesn't automatically make 2D reproductions of them a copyright violation.
Comment I'm aware of the limitations you outline, they don't apply to this picture. Thanks for the long-version. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:02, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for indicating your understanding. Your original reply didn't, and I can only go by what you wrote- that's why I'd felt the need to re-explain it.
- I hadn't intended starting an argument, only to make the point that in cases of 3D works of art, it's worth considering whether FOP applies regardless of copyright. It probably doesn't apply here, but it might in similar-looking cases. Even if it's not what you meant, some might take your original rationale to mean that anything featuring Disney characters is always a copyvio (rather than probably). Ubcule (talk) 13:51, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
- Ubcule Each image is discussed on its own particular merits; to say that how one image closes would affect all other images is part of COM:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and isn't considered in DN's. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:30, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
- My point was that I believe these issues should have been considered in the first place, even if they were ultimately dismissed. Anyway, this has been done, and I think we're both agreed that this is probably a copyvio unless anyone out there knows better. Cheers, Ubcule (talk) 19:10, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 20:48, 28 June 2016 (UTC)