Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Uppatasanti Pagoda

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:Uppatasanti Pagoda

[edit]

Freedom of panorama ceased to exist in Burma (Myanmar) upon their introduction of their very first copyright law in 2019, repealing the 1911 British Copyright Act (see COM:FOP Myanmar). Their law appears to retroactively apply to copyrighted works.

The work shown is w:en:Uppatasanti Pagoda, completed in 2009. As there is no FOP in Burma/Myanmar, a commercial license permission from the architect or whoever holds the design copyright is required.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete per nom. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:11, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment What do you mean by "appears to retroactively apply"? Do you know if it is retroactive or not? If not, why delete files uploaded before 2019? -- Jakubhal 04:13, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jakubhal: per the existing English translation provided by Lincoln Legal Services (Myanmar) Ltd: as provided by two provisions at the last part of the law: "A Copyright protected according to the Myanmar Copyright Act 1914 shall be subject to the protection and the protection period of this law" (Section 87). For another one at Section 90, "Copies of a Reproduced Work made without the authorisation of the Copyright Owner or Related Rights Owner, but according to the law before the effective date of this law may be distributed to the public within two years from the effective date of this law." Put together, any protected work that were protected through the 1911 act becomes protected courtesy of the 2019 law, and any uauthorized reproductions (like photographs) of copyrighted works can only be distributed within two years from the date the law came into effect. By 2022 that two years has elapsed and any unauthorized reproductions are now violating the Burmese law. CC licenses may be irrevocable, but these cannot stand a chance in front of the courts in Burma/Myanmar. The law does not provide a non-retroactive clause, so it is safe to consider the 2019 law as retroactive. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • Keep. First, I took some of the pictures above on my own. Second, this pagoda is a replica of the Shwedagon Pagoda, which gained the current design and height in 1775. Third, where does it state that the replica pagoda is copyrighted? Hybernator (talk) 03:42, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hybernator: at least in the U.S., replicas of sculptures are considered copyrightable. Replicas of public-domain Statue of Liberty in places like the Philippines, if the artist of the replica isn't yet dead for many years, are under artwork copyrights. Burmese standards may treat modern replicas of architecture as copyrighted objects.
    Your ownership of your photos does not matter; what matters here is the lack of Burmese freedom of panorama and the shooting of copyrighted work for conmercial publication on Commons (free CC licenses allowed here are inherently commercial). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:41, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like to know if this is the case.@JWilz12345: do you know if a replica building of a 1775 structure is copyrighted? Who is the owner of the copyright in this case? I read your reply for @Hybernator: , and I see that you are talking about something that may be true. But there was the real work to edit and upload those pictures. Or to move it from English Wikipedia, as I've seen in one of those cases. In most cases (for sure, in the case of my photo uploaded in 2017), it was perfectly ok back then. But if we need to remove them because the Burmese government decided to change the law retroactively, then let's do it. However, please let's make sure first before removing all illustrations of the major object of a capital city, disrupting all articles using those pictures. -- Jakubhal 14:53, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question JWilz12345, you say "Burmese standards may treat modern replicas of architecture as copyrighted objects," with the key phrase being "may treat." Is there any way to find out whether they do treat replicas as copyrighted or not? (Parenthetically, I have to wonder what the illegal military regime there would be able to accomplish if they tried a lawsuit, but that's beside the point...) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find out what Wikimedia's policy on Ex Post Facto laws are; I know the US doesn't recognize them. mr.choppers (talk)-en- 13:52, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mr.choppers in terms of FOP, however, the files are unfree in the country of origin of the architectural work (in this case, Myanmar). Files in Commons must be free both in U.S. and in the work's country of origin. See also COM:FOP#Choice of law. Note that Myanmar is a party to Berne Convention and its ex-post facto copyright law is duly recognized by WIPO, as evidenced by existence of WIPO copy of the law in Burmese language. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:17, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination and discussion. --Abzeronow (talk) 16:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Uppatasanti_Pagoda&oldid=802936867"