Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with © Richard Koek

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.

Files found with Special:Search/© Richard Koek

[edit]

Copyright holder belongs to Richard Koek, a New York-based freelance photographer, not a work from Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken (Ministry of Foreign Affairs)

A1Cafel (talk) 17:37, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep all. As has become clear in an earlier discussion (Pinging @Victuallers), the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs sometimes hires freelance photographers whose work is released under a CC BY-SA license. That the photographer is mentioned as the copyright holder does not mean the license is wrong, but that attribution must be given to them to comply with the CC BY-SA terms. There are no signs that this is a case of license laundering. — Ætoms (talk) 13:24, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • person at hotel - Is that the manager, you must come to my room I can see a naked person opposite and they havent drawn the curtains.
  • manager - well I've come to your room, but I'm really surprised by your complaint as the hotel is designed to stop anyone overseeing another room. I can just about make out the person's head in the room opposite but I have no idea if they are naked.
  • person at hotel - Oh you have to stand on the wardrobe.
This story came to mind when I see this. The manager's time was wasted chasing after some created infringments of the rules. Was the law being broken? Well only if the judge is willing to stand on the wardrobe. Have we really managed to get commons so pristine that this imaginary scenario is a priority? Do we need to "stand on the wardrobe"? ...Are we saying that it could be that this photographer may have not been hired legally by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs may have decided to make an unusual license choice becuase the Ministry of Foreign Affairs may have decided to ignore international law, because despite the Ministry of Foreign Affairs being a reputable expert in international rights they have decided to ignore their own expertise, because they are not as skilled as we are at stopping ourselves from succeeding. If someone is bothered about this then it would be Richard Koek - and we are being asked to imagine that because he is a "a New York-based freelance photographer" then he refuses work from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs .... meaning that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has decided to steal his work. This is time wasting. If anyone is bothered then contact Richard Koek and get him to complain publically about the theft by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Let us see proof that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs isnt trying harder than we are to publish their photos freely. I'm happy to back the deletion if the evidence is clear and unambiguous. I havent got time to stand on the wardrobe, I'm assuming that these experts may know what they are doing. Victuallers (talk) 22:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment We do have cases that a governmental department performed license landuring. At least VRT permission is required. --A1Cafel (talk) 03:06, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is just one case involving a different governmental department from a different country. The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been publishing photographs under this license for years, including works by freelance photographers they hired. The publication of their work under a CC BY-SA license is most probably part of their contract with the ministry. I don't see a reason to doubt the genuineness of the licensing here, especially since one of the freelance photographers already confirmed that it is correct (see Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with © Cynthia van Elk). — Ætoms (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: We will assume that the Dutch government knows what it's doing. —holly {chat} 21:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_found_with_©_Richard_Koek&oldid=835587609"