Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Aeou

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 uploaded by Aeou (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No freedom of panorama in Ukraine. I deleted a few of them but a few users protested. So putting these through a DR. Comment from the users pasted below.


Vandalism - too fast use to be copyvio actions

Hi. Please, stop deleting photos without discussion. At least inform me about your desire to delete something from Ukraine before doing. And restore please all photos you delete in Lviv - as you might know Lviv was polish before 1939 and all buildings built before this date are free according to Polish law. --A1 (talk) 20:34, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Well - regarding the pictures which were assumed to be copyvio due to no freedom of panorama in Ukraine and showing buildings made by Polish architects before II World War - the case is not that obvious and IMHO should be carefully discussed - maybe even with help of professional lawyer.

I don't know anything about current Ukrainian law - but if we assume that

  1. Lviv was Polish before II world war
  2. the architect was Polish citizen

The applicable copyright law for architectural work is rather Polish than Ukrainian.

Actually the buildings are on Ukrainian soil - but the copyright is not about physical objects but about the creative work of architect, so in fact it doesn't matter where the physical object is actually located to decide which law is applicable.

Regarding Polish copyright law - copyright expires after 70 years after the death of the author - but except the case where it was a work for hire with transfer of copyright to the employer. In case of transfer of copyright of work for hire the copyright expires after 70 years of first publication of the work. In case of architectural works - the publication means to built a building as it can be seen by general public from the road. Architects are usually working for hire and they usually transfer copyright to the owner of the building. Overall - I think it is not very probable that the architectural works of Polish architects made before II World War are actually still copyrightable, and even if they are - as Polish law has a freedom of panorama and applicable law is rather Polish than Ukrainian - there is still no reason to delete the pictures... I would suggest to undelete the pictures and discuss the issue as it is not so obvious copyvio. Polimerek (talk) 22:13, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Extended content

Sreejith K (talk) 05:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sidenote: you should never speedy delete FoP photos. From my experience in Romania, about 5-10% of them can be kept as De minimis or for other reasons. Please go through AfD and notify the uploader to give him at least a chance to expain the uploads.--Strainu (talk) 08:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Answer (Ukrainian)

[edit]

Доброго дня усім. Я вже не перший рік займаюсь з'ясуванням авторства будівель у Львові, маю майже усю доступну літературу на цю тему. У рамках WLM я завантажив понад 1 тис. файлів, зробивши перед цим аналіз авторства і дат побудови усіх цих споруд (!). Я завантажив лише:

  • споруди, автори яких померли 70 років тому, або давніше;
  • споруди, збудовані понад 70 років тому, при цьому дата смерті авторів невідома (а останні згадки про авторів трапились не менш ніж 70 років тому);
  • споруди, збудовані понад 70 років тому (до 1942), автори яких невідомі.

Після 30 вересня я виконав повторну (!) перевірку усіх цих понад 1 тис. файлів і виявив серед них близько 70, де зображені маловідомі споруди І. Багенського (помер 1967), Л. Карасінського (помер 1952), Т. Врубеля (помер 1974), Є. Весоловського (помер 1950). Я номінував їх усіх на швидке вилучення і Sreejithk2000 вилучив (за виключенням 7 файлів, які він чомусь не вилучив і додав уже до цього абсурдного DR). Те що залишилось після моїх перевірок - заледве хтось зможе оскаржити.

Сьогодні я бачу, що на вилучення номіновано ще 735 (!) файлів. Я вже двічі їх перевіряв - вони усі вільні. Ви хоч би глянули що номінуєте - серед зображень є маса споруд 17-19 століть...

Не знаю, який має бути алгоритм дій при одночасній номінації 735 файлів. Можу лише деталізувати опис кожного файлу українською мовою (нажаль англійської не знаю). Але я зроблю це лише тоді, якщо номінатор пообіцяє проаналізувати кожне (!) описання.

Якщо файли усе ж залишать, особисто прошу номінатора - приберіть усі 735 повідомлень {{delete|reason}} із файлів. Робіть як хочете - ботом чи вручну. Я цієї дурної роботи робити не буду.

Вибачте, що пишу з помилками. Англійської не знаю і користуюсь автоперекладачем.

-- P. S. А чому лише 735 файлів? Я вантажу файли з 2010 року - всього понад 2,5 тис. Може давайте усі номінуємо? Буде весело.--Сергій (обг.) 17:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Answer (English)

[edit]

Hi everyone. I am making researches on the authorship of buildings in Lviv for a few years. I have almost all available literature on this topic. During WLM I uploaded over 1 thousand files. I made analysis of authorship and dates of construction of all (!) of them. I uploaded only:

  • buildings, whose authors have died 70 years ago, or before;
  • buildings, built over 70 years ago, with authors' date of death unknown (and the last mention of the authors happened no less than 70 years ago);
  • Buildings, built over 70 years ago (before 1942), whose authors are unknown.

After 30 September, I performed a second (!) check with literature these more than 1 thousand files and found near 70 images, which shows the buildings of I. Bagenskyi (died 1967), L. Karasiński (died 1952), T. Wróbel (died 1974), J. Wesolowski (died 1950). I nominated for speedy deletion and Sreejithk2000 deleted (with the exception of seven files that for some reason he kept and added to this absurd DR). The remaining files were checked so that hardly anyone will be able to accuse.

Today I see nomination to deletion of another 735 (!) files. I've double checked them - they are all free. Have you looked at the nominated files? Have you read the descriptions??? A lot of them were built in 17-19 centuries...

I do not know correct algorithm of actions with simultaneous nomination of 735 files. I can only detalise descriptions of each file in Ukrainian (unfortunately I do not know English). But I'll do it only if the nominator promises to analyze all (!) descriptions.

If the files will be kept, than I personally ask nominator - remove all 735 {{delete|reason}} from files. Do it however you want - by bot or manually. I will not do such a stupid work.

Sorry for my mistakes. I do not know English and mostly use machine translator.

- P. S. I do not understand - why only 735 files? I upload files from 2010 - just over 2.5 thousand. Nominate them all. It will be fun.--Сергій (обг.) 17:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC) (corrected by NickK (talk))[reply]

Так а з Весоловським які проблеми? Якщо він помер 1950, буде вільним і по {{PD-Polish}}, і по {{PD-Ukraine}}.Anatoliy (talk) 23:33, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree with Sreejith that the copyright on buildings is usually transferred to the owner, and most architectural firms are smart enough to know that the copyright lasts longer if they leave it in the name of the designers, with only a license to the firm and to the builder, so it is my opinion that any of these designed by architects who died after 1942 are still under copyright. If more than one architect worked on the design, then the longest lived is the one that counts.
I Could argue this either way, and I started to present both arguments here. However, I think the better of them is as follows:  Delete When a sculpture created by, say, Alexander Calder, moves from the USA (no FOP) where it was created to Germany (broad FOP), we use that exception to allow images to be kept on Commons. In the other direction, we do not keep images of sculptures that were created in countries with FOP that are on display in non-FOP countries, see Commons:Deletion requests/UN Art Collection. Our rule on FOP is consistently that it is the law where the work is located that is applicable. I think that reasoning applies whether the work was physically moved from country to country or if the work changed countries from a border change. Thus, while I would argue that Polish law might determine the length of the copyright, Ukrainian law determines that there is no applicable FOP. I'm going to ask Carl Lindberg to comment. .     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 20:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can you comment my arguments?--Сергій (обг.) 21:00, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why? I do not understand. The subject of copyright is architectural work - not the building as such. The work was made by Polish citizen at the time where Lviv was part of Republic of Poland. So the only applicable law which protects the work is Polish. Ukrainan law can only protect the work because Poland and Ukraine are both signatores of Berne Convention and WIPO treaty, but it means that the work is protected only to the level of protection of the country of origin. (see article 5 of Berne Convention). The country of origin of the architectural work is Second Republic of Poland. At the time when buildings were erected there was no independent Republic of Ukraine at all, so these works were never protected by Ukrainan copyright law. This is completely different legal situation than in case of Germany or France, where there were shifts of borders but both countries existed and had their own copyright law. Polimerek (talk) 23:39, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: This batch request is closed. Many Aeou's images are good. Please nominate each problem building or each problem architector in separate DRs. Anatoliy (talk) 09:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]