Commons:Deletion requests/Files of User:Raphael Saulus (Part 2)

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 of User:Raphael Saulus (Part 2)

[edit]

Dates of sources of pictures conflict with claim of PD Sweden --Kramer Associates (talk) 02:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I struck out two pictures of people dead long enough that any anonymous pictures of them would be PD Sweden. --Kramer Associates (talk) 04:45, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More of the same --Kramer Associates (talk) 03:07, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More of the same --Kramer Associates (talk) 05:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"I've got a little list..." --Kramer Associates (talk) 05:51, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. The ones with 1959 in the title has a book published in 1959 as source, so they are clearly from before 1969. I haven't looked at all images, but I think most images either have sources that are old enough or are of people who died before 1969. /Ö 17:40, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What's the difference between "fotografiska verk" (PD pre-1944) and "fotografiska bilder" (PD pre-1969)? (I put them up for deletion because I assumed they were "fotografiska verk" and therefore possibly not PD.) --Kramer Associates (talk) 19:22, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Fotografiska verk" are supposed to be more or less works of art, and quite rare. Routinely taken images, such as those for the news, for advertisements or simpler portraits, are regarded as "fotografiska bilder". This is according to the preparatory works of the law of 1960 and may not be true any more (it did not use the term "work", but made a similar distinction); the new law of 1994 did not discuss the matter.
There is a huge grey area between images certainly works and images regarded as works by some copyright organisations: no one seems interested in going to the court without a very strong case (and in that case, the other party will give up in time). I am afraid the precautionary principle (here and elsewhere), if overused, might affect what is regarded a work.
--LPfi (talk) 10:45, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep: I looked at the first dozen or so images and I think they clearly were ordinary portraits and the like. If there are some images that could be regarded as photographic works, then please point those out. --LPfi (talk) 10:53, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One was tagged, but missing here:

Kept most of them because they're properly licensed and published early enough or show persons who died before 1969; deleted some who did not meet those criteria. --Rosenzweig τ 15:09, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_of_User:Raphael_Saulus_(Part_2)&oldid=64889861"