Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Henrique Manzo

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:Henrique Manzo

[edit]

Henrique Manzo died in 1982, his work is not yet out of copyright. The OTRS ticket contains some general statement of a museum, which does not apply to the copyright of this author.

Jcb (talk) 13:34, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep, "Museu Paulista" has the economic rights of all these works. Sturm (talk) 13:47, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep The institution has fairly clearly declared their own ownership of the works, in a public space. If our materials are mislabeled, its the institutions issue: and if they withdraw the content for whatever reason, we should be ready to do so. Sadads (talk) 00:56, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
Hi Jcb, thank you for paying attention to the photos we are uploading through this GLAM. Yes, you are correct stating that the author Henrique Manzo died in 1982 and, therefore, his work is not yet in the public domain. However, his works inside the collection of the "Museu Paulista" had their economic rights transferred to the Museum and so, the Museum is able to release them using an open license, just like we did. Authors' moral rights are distinct from economic rights. Regards, Sturm (talk) 03:51, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a copy of the document in which the copyright transfer took place to OTRS. At this moment there is nothing in the ticket, Manzo is not even mentioned. Jcb (talk) 15:02, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here we go: This link is under the Museum's official website and states, in a free translation, that "all the works related to this GLAM are under the patrimonial (economic) rights of the museum and, although a good part of them is already in the public domain, in cases to the contrary we will make them available using a license Creative Commons BY-AS 4.0". Regards, Sturm (talk) 20:15, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What we are missing is not a claim from the museum. We need to see a statement from the (heirs of the) artist. We have seen too many cases where a museum mistakenly claims to be the copyright hold of works just because the physical work is inside their building. Jcb (talk) 20:29, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Paulista Museum, as you may have noticed, is a museum founded more than 100 years ago, which is part of the largest and most highly valued university in Brazil, the University of São Paulo. The history of this museum, therefore, is positively confused with the history of many of the works of its own collection, since a significant part of them was painted thanks to orders made by the museum itself. Thus, the possession of the patrimonial rights of these works is supported by not only a documentary basis – which is easy to find on the internet -- link 01 / link 02, present even in the bibliography of the studies of these paintings, but by the general context of production itself. Momentarily, the museum is closed for renovation, as you can read here (http://www.mp.usp.br/presentation), and this imposes a difficulty in accessing the original documents of assignment of the rights to the museum for each work or artist. But the director of the museum, Solange Lima (http://www.usp.br/imprensa/?p=61972), is a historian who is a specialist on the Paulista Museum collection, and has full conditions to attest what the museum is able or not able to do in terms of its collection economic rights. So, the people involved in this GLAM project (an organized user group and the director of one of the main Brazilian museums), know what they are doing –and we are sympathetic to your claim that some GLAM initiatives may be messed up, but this general rule of thumb cannot be applied to this specific case. Anyway, we can ask the museum's board of directors to state explicitly the authors not yet in the public domain who will be involved in this GLAM project, if you believe this would solve this matter. Sturm (talk) 16:12, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Did you even read what I wrote above? Apparently not. What we are missing is not a claim from the museum. We need to see a statement from the (heirs of the) artist. So please send us a copy of the document in which the artist agreed to transfer the copyright to the museum. Jcb (talk) 21:03, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Per the same reasoning as in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:José Wasth Rodrigues. There is founded, documented evidence that those works were "work-for-hire", commissioned to the painter by the museum, which specified what he should paint in great detail. Many, if not all the paintings, are also painted copies of Militão Augusto de Azevedo photographs, for long in Public Domain, and therefore should not attract any new copyrights under the Brazilian law. See COM:TOO#Brazil for some available jurisprudence on what constitutes an original work of art in Brazil, which is considerably more stricter than the US, which usually is the reference here. Personally, I do not have any doubt that the copyright of those works, if any, belongs to the Museum.-- Darwin Ahoy! 16:03, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Henrique_Manzo&oldid=358743021"