Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:European Court of Human Rights

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:European Court of Human Rights

[edit]

DR due to the media nominated containg views of a "recent" architectural work in France, which does not have Freedom of Panorama. (I appreciate that it's somewhat irritating that a prominent building connected with civil liberties, cannot be illustrated because of restrictive copyright laws.)

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:31, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this one should be  Keep, as the building is very much accessory to the picture: File:Chantier ligne E chantier juillet 2007 13.JPG.-- Darwin Ahoy! 12:40, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Would you concur that the same view would appply to File:Strasbourg- Av. de l'Europe (Rue Sforza).jpg also? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Keepall !!Hello , this is my work and this,photo taken from my balcony, what's the problem ??the question has already been asked in France but there is absolutely no restriction coe.int coe.int (en) the only restriction is to credit the architects, only if the photos were made by the council of europe!!!!!--Nicoleon (talk) 18:57, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you feel strongly that the disclaimer is all that applies ask the ECHR to confirm the exact situation via OTRS.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:04, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's completely ridiculous, read this [1]. Every day there are dozens of journalists who photograph these buildings, there are no restrictions.--Nicoleon (talk) 22:18, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep File:Ep strasbourg 24.jpg and File:Cour européenne des droits de l'homme en Hiver.JPG, as the buildings is not the main subject of the photo (and couldn't even be viewed in any way that would abuse the copyright of the architect).-- Darwin Ahoy! 21:58, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep File:Strasbourg- Av. de l'Europe (Rue Sforza).jpg : the subject is obviously not the building, which is only incidental to the photo.-- Darwin Ahoy! 21:59, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I may vote  Keep based on the court's copyright page: They have a section called "Reproduction of photos of the Human Rights Building", and they imply that such photos are allowed, only that The name of the architects must be mentioned: "Richard Rogers Partnership" and "Atelier Claude Bucher Architectes". Most every other section in there tries to prevent commercial use (such as text and photos found on their website), but that section mentions nothing of that sort. So this may be a single-building FoP license, basically. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep all, per Clindberg.-- Darwin Ahoy! 15:10, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: stupida lex, sed lex, some kept as De minimis. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 09:30, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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:European Court of Human Rights

[edit]

Court filings and rulings are not necessarily PD or CC licensed. Furthermore some of these are claimed as self, with no obvious link between the uploader and parties to the filing or ruling.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:37, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Striking out three entries from the request that would reasonably be exempt. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:49, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Court filings and laws are PD in most countries due to the exception in the Berne Convention. I don't see the cause to delete them. Off course we should improve metadata --Hannolans (talk) 10:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Many countries do not protect court rulings. They are fine in the U.S. per {{PD-EdictGov}}. Submissions by the parties are not rulings however, so those are copyrightable and would need a license (though they could possibly be filed by a government which does not allow copyright in the first place). Article 44 of the European Convention on Human Rights mandates their rulings are published, unsure if that implies some sort of free license or not. Their copyright page does seem to claim copyright (and give a non-commercial license) on all "texts and videos" on the website, which is wider in scope than the actual rulings. It would only be the actual rulings which could be OK. Obviously they would want to make sure that the content is as unchanged as possible. Unsure if that is enough for the rulings. Obviously, Commons is non-commercial and educational in nature so we are within their general license. Frankly... given the mandate to publish them in the convention in the first place, I would have no problem keeping them. They are fine in the U.S. for sure. Seems like a pretty edgy deletion. However, arguments submitted by the parties would be different. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:23, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Minded to withdraw, pending someone getting a more definitive position, from someone appropriately qualified. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:03, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per discussion. --Gbawden (talk) 07:01, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:European_Court_of_Human_Rights&oldid=551366596"