Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Plush toys

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.

Selected files in Category:Plush toys

[edit]

The photographs listed below fail to meet the official guidelines of COM:TOYS, specifically:

When uploading a picture of a toy, you must show that the toy is in the public domain in both the United States and in the source country of the toy. In the United States, copyright is granted for toys even if the toy is ineligible for copyright in the source country.

There has been no evidence presented that the toy(s) at the focus of the photograph, and named in the category or title, are public domain.

For an in-depth background and explanation of Commons copyright policies, refer to the Stuffed Animals essay and the precedent of prior closely related deletion requests: Petit tigre, Erminig, Wendy the Weasel & Percy Plush, Wikimania 2014 Day 1, Jimmy Wales meeting Mr Penguin.

Photographs in this nomination are:

--Fæ (talk) 19:26, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is a good time for your periodic, friendly reminder that we also delete considerable amounts of design furniture and at the same time accept photographs of cars as industrial design. Rama (talk) 20:26, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Rama: That's why we have a DR. But this pic looks that the bird (or what is it?) is self made so we could ask the creator to give us permission to publish the pic with a free license. But unfortunately in US the TOO on toys is realy pretty low and we need to delete it. The car design issue the design is also influenced by aerodynamics and other engineering aspects.--Sanandros (talk) 21:40, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
it's an owl and her creator has released it under Cc-by-sa. The engineering aspects of care is moot, you have similar constraints for chairs, that we delete; it's just that lots of people like cars, there is nothing consistent, noble or rigourous about this situation. Rama (talk) 23:10, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Rama: Can u link a DR of a deleted chair so I can check that also? I can't find in a short time the link which I recently read but in desing it's generally like this, what has no function is copyrightable.--Sanandros (talk) 05:56, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For instance: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Little Tulip Chair - Pierre Paulin.png.
We also have instances where the exact same sort of objects end up being kept: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Orange Slice Chair-Pierre Paulin IMG 5833-white.jpg
So let's not take ourselves too seriously, Commons is a very worthy project but it is unserious about copyright as soon as we depart from very trivial cases. Rama (talk) 09:44, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The conflict and mixed implementation is understandable, though COM:UA does specifically quote cars and furniture as "utilitarian". However if an example car had unusual artistic livery or had been custom sculptured, it may become more artwork than utility, similarly a chair that was more sculpture than function would be treated as an artwork. I believe the deletion of the Tulip chair was an error, as though classic design, the chair has no obvious features that are not there for its function.
I suggest we avoid digging much further in this DR, as it is a tangent to the question of toys, where there is specific case law to reference (see the essay linked in the nomination). However to close this down, I have asked the deleting admin for the Pierre Paulin chair to review the case diff. Both photographs should be seen to have the same outcome. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 10:21, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: User:Rama, if you see an inconsistency here, it is not generated at Commons, but at the various copyright offices around the world. There is no place that I know of where cars have copyrights. Furniture has copyrights in some places, Toys have copyrights everywhere. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:41, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, that is nonsense. We are not lawyers, we a treading on complicated legal questions, and we use gross rules of thumbs that are inconsistent and often more rooted in self-serving expedience than anything else. Rama (talk) 08:24, 15 November 2017 (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:Plush toys 2

[edit]

COM:TOYS.

Yuraily Lic (talk) 20:47, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete per nom.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 22:43, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:46, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Plush_toys&oldid=597225955"