Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Vittoriano Viganò
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:Vittoriano Viganò
[edit]Unfortunately there's no FOP in Italy and the creator of the works in these images, Vittoriano Viganò, died in 1996. So they are copyrighted until at least 2066.
- File:Paolo Monti - Servizio fotografico (Milano, 1956) - BEIC 6355792.jpg
- File:Paolo Monti - Servizio fotografico (Milano, 1956) - BEIC 6365434.jpg
- File:Paolo Monti - Servizio fotografico (Milano, 1956) - BEIC 6365436.jpg
- File:Paolo Monti - Servizio fotografico (Milano, 1958) - BEIC 6355793.jpg
- File:Paolo Monti - Servizio fotografico (Milano, 1979) - BEIC 6355789.jpg
- File:Paolo Monti - Servizio fotografico - BEIC 6355788.jpg
Adamant1 (talk) 03:03, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- What's the copyrightable work in the first three photos and how did you reach the conclusion the photos are a derivative work? According to the best information available, Paolo Monti had permission from the copyright holders for downstream licensing, see Commons:BEIC. Nemo 05:47, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- The art instillation or whatever it is, which I assume was created by Vittoriano Viganò. As to the rights, according to the page that you linked to "This statement is consistent with the story of the photos as we know of it: the artists commissioned the photos for inclusion in future publications authored by Paolo Monti." I'm sure you'd agree that Commons and the whole "image that anyone can use for any purpose" thing doesn't include "publications authored by Paolo Monti." Although them specifically saying it's just "the story as they know it" doesn't exactly sound like a guarantee everything is totally above board anyway. But even if it was, "publications authored by Paolo Monti" clearly doesn't allow for indiscriminate re-use regardless. Same goes for point 3 and 4 on that list BTW. In fact point 3 just nonsensical handwaving, at least as far as Commons is concerned if not more generally. Whereas point 4 is just patently false on it's face. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:00, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- The "future publications" bit is meant to include things such as the Paolo Monti collection online, which is under CC BY-SA. Commons can host copies of CC BY-SA publications. I'm not sure what you mean by saying that point 4 is false, can you clarify? Further legal analysis about the general case is available, which distinguishes between 1:1 copy and original work from the photographer. You said the photos are a derivative work so you don't seem to challenge the original component, so you seem to agree we fall in the second case (of which derivative works are one possibility). Nemo 06:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- It specifically says "future publications authored by Paolo Monti", Not just "future publications" and Paolo Monti obviously didn't create the website. Regardless though, anyone can release a photograph under a CC BY-SA license. That has nothing to do with if it's COPYVIO because what's being depicted in the image is copyrighted. Although the article still clearly says future publications authored by Paolo Monti, not anything created by anyone years after their death. As to why point four is patently false, the whole thing seems to be insinuating that there's no FOP for 3D objects in countries that follow the Berne convention or that photographs of 3D objects aren't considered derivative works in general. Both of which are clearly wrong. Otherwise there would have been zero reason for Paolo Monti to get permission to take the photographs to begin with. Although there's plenty of countries that follow the Berne convention while still not allowing for FOP. Italy being one of them. There's zero evidence that it's fine to take pictures of otherwise copyrighted 3D objects in Italy just because they follow the Berne convention. Or again there'd be zero reason for all these permissions to begin with. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:29, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- The "future publications" bit is meant to include things such as the Paolo Monti collection online, which is under CC BY-SA. Commons can host copies of CC BY-SA publications. I'm not sure what you mean by saying that point 4 is false, can you clarify? Further legal analysis about the general case is available, which distinguishes between 1:1 copy and original work from the photographer. You said the photos are a derivative work so you don't seem to challenge the original component, so you seem to agree we fall in the second case (of which derivative works are one possibility). Nemo 06:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- The art instillation or whatever it is, which I assume was created by Vittoriano Viganò. As to the rights, according to the page that you linked to "This statement is consistent with the story of the photos as we know of it: the artists commissioned the photos for inclusion in future publications authored by Paolo Monti." I'm sure you'd agree that Commons and the whole "image that anyone can use for any purpose" thing doesn't include "publications authored by Paolo Monti." Although them specifically saying it's just "the story as they know it" doesn't exactly sound like a guarantee everything is totally above board anyway. But even if it was, "publications authored by Paolo Monti" clearly doesn't allow for indiscriminate re-use regardless. Same goes for point 3 and 4 on that list BTW. In fact point 3 just nonsensical handwaving, at least as far as Commons is concerned if not more generally. Whereas point 4 is just patently false on it's face. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:00, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Monti's Foundation hasn't the rights from Viganò heirs (unless this is forwarded to COM:VRT. Kept File:Paolo Monti - Servizio fotografico - BEIC 6355788.jpg per, at least, de minimis. Ruthven (msg) 16:14, 12 November 2023 (UTC)