Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorio de Tenerife (detail)

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 in Category:Auditorio de Tenerife (detail)

[edit]

According to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Spain Spanish FOP law only allows for works that are "permanently located in parks or on streets, squares or other public thoroughfares." Whereas this auditorium clearly isn't situated in or on a public throughfare. So these images are copyrighted until an undetermined date since the artist, Santiago Calatrava, seems to still be alive.

Adamant1 (talk) 04:14, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain, why do you think, "this auditorium clearly isn't situated in or on a public throughfare." I visit the site and can say, it is clearly situated in or on a public throughfare! There is no gate - in fact this is a public space - call it street or square. Maybe it helps to use streetview --Rlbberlin (talk) 06:43, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of things, first of all adjacent to road the road on private property and only receives meaningful traffic when something is going on there. Which doesn't make it either "in or on a throughfare" or even public for purposes of the law. Also, your assertion that its a public street because there's no fence and you walk through there sometimes is totally ridiculous since the grounds of most businesses aren't fenced off and people walk through them if they want to. It's called window shopping. That doesn't mean the buildings of every business is a street or qualifies for FOP. In this case I assume they allow admittance to the building for specific events and can kick anyone off the property if they want to. So it's not really "public." Even if that weren't the case though, "in or on a throughfare" doesn't every building even slightly near, by, or adjacent to a road qualifies for FOP in Spain. Same goes for every building where people can walk through the property under certain conditions. BTW, looking at Google Street view access the stairs going around the building are also blocked, there's gate at the entrance to the underground parking lot, and the left side of the property is fenced off. None of that makes a "thoroughfare" even if people can walk around the back. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:24, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Per the reasons stated in the other similar deletion request you opened. In the future, please open a single deletion request, so that the the entire discussion is kept in one place. I also urge you to respond to those that oppose your views with the same courtesy that they have shown you. Statements like the "your assertion [...] is totally ridiculous" above are uncalled for and unproductive. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 07:41, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Statements like the "your assertion [...] is totally ridiculous" above are uncalled for and unproductive. I'd say the same about keep statements that are based purely on procedural nitpicking or language policing instead of addressing the reasons I gave for the deletion request. I'm under no obligation to open a single deletion request. Where as it is on keep voters to state why they think images should be kept. And just an FYI, but your comment in the other deletion doesn't do anything in regard for the reasons I've already provided in both DRs. That's not to say I have an issue with you referring to a comment in another deletion request, but I urge to at least wait until the DR where you made the comment is closed in case your logic turns out to be wrong, or at least hold of on linking to it until the discussion is over with and summarize your points. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:50, 23 October 2023 (UTC)-[reply]
  •  Keep Having been there, I can say that the auditorium is located in a public area, there are no access restrictions for the outside, so it is obviously eligible for FOP. It is a government-owned building and hence is public land (see [1]). Additionally, File:At Tenerife 2020 888.jpg was literally taken from across a public thoroughfare. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:38, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are no access restrictions for the outside I must have imagined the rope blocking access to the stairs and the fence blocking off the right of the property on Google Street View then. That aside though, do you have any sources to back up your claim that the images would qualify for FOP simply because you took them while standing on a public thoroughfare? Because there doesn't seem to be anything in the guidelines for Spain saying where the photograph was taken from matters. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This fence/rope and this fence are temporary, as you can check yourself by browsing earlier versions of Street View (click on the bottom thumbnails) or checking the images you have nominated for deletion, such as this one (taken from the back of the building) or this one (taken from the top of the staircase). Not that it matters in the slightest: both on this DR and on your other similar DR, you have been provided with ample evidence that this is a public building located on public grounds. There may be some contentious claims of FOP out there, but this is not one of them. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:25, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just a clarification, Someone else told me to look at Google Street View because supposedly it showed they don't restrict access to the public and that's not what the images showed. So I pointed it out. Nowhere I have claimed the fence or rope are permanent, but it really wouldn't matter anyway since in most places the important thing to what makes something a public throughfare or place is if the owner can deny access to the public, not how long or to what degree. Simply that they have the ability to if they want to. Which is clearly the case here even if the fence and rope don't exist 7 days a week, 365 days a year. And I don't really care if people disagree with that. It's how these laws work and I'm not going to act like it isn't just so a couple of uploaders don't go around throwing a tantrums by bigrading discussions and insulting me in other DRs just because a few of their images were potentially deleted. Regardless, all we need here is reasonable doubt and I think I've shown that. It's ultimately on whomever closes this to decide the outcome, but the evidence is what it is and it clearly leans towards it not being a part of the square, "in or on" a public throughfare", and them being able to restrict access to the public on an arbitrarily bases if they want to. None of which would make these images qualify for FOP. Especially since it's not even clear Spain has freedom of panorama to begin with. Really, the images should be deleted just on that alone regardless of the other issues. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:14, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen roads in the Canary Islands temporarily closed for events, does that make them not public thoroughfares? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 09:28, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your question seems like kind of a strawman since auditoriums obviously aren't roads, but I'll answer it anyway since its seems like people aren't going to just drop this. Sure roads are public throughfares even if they are temporarily closed for events, because they aren't owned and operated by a third party who has full time staff that manages the property (can kick whomever they want off the property for whatever reason they feel like) and exists outside of the roads department. Plus roads don't usually have closing and opening hours. Whereas, auditoriums obviously do. I'm sure you get the differences. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:41, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment it's not even clear Spain has freedom of panorama I think you may have a point here, so I removed my 'Keep' vote. The Spanish FOP Wiki page lists the case as 'unclear', and the general FOP wiki page, although listing spain as 'FOP - OK' at the beginning, further down specifically highlights the Auditorio de Tenerife as a potential exception, because it is trademarked (and indeed it is). I'm unsure if this constitutes sufficient grounds to delete all images, or if we just need some sort of template that highlights exceptions (similar to the Personality rights template applied to portratis). I hope that someone that is well into the details can weight in here. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:55, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep First time in my live that I hear that a building on Spanish soil could be a FOP violation. I've been there twice and had no problem to access the site from any side. Furthermore, the building belongs to the town hall and is therefore public [2], including the surrounding area. The only thing I agree on with Adamant1 here is that Santiago Calatrava didn't die over 70 years ago. Poco a poco (talk) 07:59, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First time in my live that I hear that a building on Spanish soil could be a FOP violation. There's plenty of instances of exactly that here. So it by no means be an anomaly if these images were deleted. And as to your personal accessing the site, your personal experiences with buildings being in Spain FOP violations clearly aren't valid. So I don't see why you accessing the site would be. Oh and BTW, as I think other people have already pointed out, the determining factor to if somewhere is a "public place" or not has nothing to do with ownership. At least not in the way your insinuating it does. The government can own a building and it can still be a private place for purposes of FOP. They aren't mutually exclusive. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:09, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per Mike Peel and consensus, this appears to be permanently located in a public place. --Abzeronow (talk) 20:55, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Auditorio_de_Tenerife_(detail)&oldid=844976540"