Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Dagens Nyheter
Files in Category:Dagens Nyheter
[edit]All newspapers published in Sweden since 1926 are copyrighted for publication+95 years in the United States. Files on Commons have to be free in both the country of origin and in the United States.
- File:Dagens Nyheter 1 september 1939.jpg
- File:Dagens Nyheter 13 mars 1932.jpg
- File:Dagens Nyheter 16 maj 1930.jpg
- File:Dagens Nyheter 22 maj 1927.jpg
- File:Dagens Nyheter 31 januari 1933.jpg
- File:Dagens Nyheter 7 maj 1937.jpg
- File:DN1939-12-01.jpg
- File:Stripa.jpg
Stefan4 (talk) 15:48, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Comment User:Pieter Kuiper stated on his user talk page But I think you are wrong because this was free in Sweden on the URAA date. A Keep statement for this image of him. --High Contrast (talk) 16:03, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Delete because they're copyrighted in Sweden too, due to the photos. The template says This Swedish photograph is free to use, but many of them (especially the Nazi photos) were likely not first published in Sweden, and we don't know whether they were anonymous works (probably not). -- Liliana-60 (talk) 16:05, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Photos from that time entered the public domain in Sweden 25 years after they were taken, so the photos are free in Sweden at least. Foreign photos also entered the public domain in Sweden 25 years after they were taken even if the source country used a longer copyright term. If published concurrently in multiple Berne Convention countries (for example, in Sweden and Germany) within 30 days, the country of origin is the country with the shortest copyright term (in this case Sweden), see s:Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works/Articles 1 to 21#Article 5. I assume that most photos were published shortly after they were taken. It is highly unlikely that they were published with a copyright notice and with a renewal at the en:United States Copyright Office, so the photos can be assumed to be free in the United States too.
- The problem is not with the photos but with the text. Anonymous text is copyrighted for 70 years since publication. These texts appear to be anonymous, so they would appear to enter the public domain 70 years after publication. One of the articles in the newspaper from 1937 was written by a journalist stationed in New York, so I assume that this single article is free in the United States as {{PD-US-no notice}} and/or {{PD-US-not renewed}} (as works by US residents are exempt from URAA restoration), but the other articles in the same newspaper, as well as the articles in all other newspapers, appear to have been renewed by the URAA. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:23, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Sweden as a Berne member has to honor foreign copyrights, moreover due to being in the EU, it doesn't apply the rule of the shorter term to other EU countries. Going by the "simultaneous publishing" rule may work for some of these, but not for all; ex. File:Dagens Nyheter 31 januari 1933.jpg features a whole bunch of portraits, and I doubt they were all taken within 30 days before this newspaper was published. -- Liliana-60 (talk) 16:39, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Foreign copyrights are honoured by giving them (at most) as long a term as the corresponding term for a domestic work. In Sweden, the rule is that simple photos enter the public domain 50 years (previously 25 years) after they were taken, and this applies to photos from any country. Similarly, Spanish and Colombian works enter the public domain in Sweden 70 years after the death of the author, not 80 years after the death of the author. Sure, the 1933 newspaper has some suspicious photos. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, your rules apply within Sweden. But Commons policy is to honor the country of origin, which, in the case of the photos, may be a different location than Sweden. -- Liliana-60 (talk) 18:20, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, but I replied to a comment where you only mentioned the Swedish copyright status. --Stefan4 (talk) 18:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, your rules apply within Sweden. But Commons policy is to honor the country of origin, which, in the case of the photos, may be a different location than Sweden. -- Liliana-60 (talk) 18:20, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Foreign copyrights are honoured by giving them (at most) as long a term as the corresponding term for a domestic work. In Sweden, the rule is that simple photos enter the public domain 50 years (previously 25 years) after they were taken, and this applies to photos from any country. Similarly, Spanish and Colombian works enter the public domain in Sweden 70 years after the death of the author, not 80 years after the death of the author. Sure, the 1933 newspaper has some suspicious photos. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Sweden as a Berne member has to honor foreign copyrights, moreover due to being in the EU, it doesn't apply the rule of the shorter term to other EU countries. Going by the "simultaneous publishing" rule may work for some of these, but not for all; ex. File:Dagens Nyheter 31 januari 1933.jpg features a whole bunch of portraits, and I doubt they were all taken within 30 days before this newspaper was published. -- Liliana-60 (talk) 16:39, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
You say that your problem is not with the photos (which in this case are securely {{PD-Finland}} as well as PD-US, possibly also published in the US in 1939), but that the text would be protected by copyright. Well, the bulk of the text is not legible, and the headlines are not creative. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:49, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
This makes sense. I agree that the text isn't readable. I can read occasional words but not most of the text. I guess this means that the file uploaded by Pieter Kuiper is fine. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:59, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- So this means that by reducing the resolutions (which should not get rid of any encyclopedic value the images may have) they can be kept? Hmmmmm... -- Liliana-60 (talk) 18:20, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, that may be a solution, or we could blur out the text if we still want to be able to view the photos in a high resolution. There is still the issue with some photos where the Berne Convention country of origin might be Germany or some other country with a long copyright term, of course. The photos should be PD-old in Sweden, so the question is whether they are de minimis in both the United States and the source country of the photos. --Stefan4 (talk) 18:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- File:Stripa.jpg is mainly a drawing by a staff artist, protected by copyright for 70 years post mortem. It should be possible to find out who the staff artist is from a company biography. Thuresson (talk) 00:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have clear, written/textual, tangible evidence indicating that these files are indeed freely licensed under a Commons compatiable license, we cannot host them on Commons FASTILY (TALK) 03:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- None restored in 2022 because the only one from 1926 (all others are later), File:Stripa.jpg, features a drawing (not a photograph) by an unidentified artist and probably still protected per the usual 70 years pma formula. --Rosenzweig τ 21:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- One restored in 2023 that was published in 1927. Added Category:Undelete in 2047 for File:Stripa.jpg, which could be undeleted in 2047 at the latest with {{PD-old-assumed}} (1926 + 120 + 1 = 2047). —RP88 (talk) 01:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)