Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Quek157
The model has a copyright and these images are derivative works which infringe on the copyright. They cannot be kept on Commons without a free license from the creator of the model via OTRS.
- File:Overview of Canberra MRT and Canberra Plaza with the linkbridges shown (from HDB Exhibition) (full MRT station)).jpg
- File:Overview of Canberra MRT and Canberra Plaza with the linkbridges shown (from HDB Exhibition) (from south)).jpg
- File:Overview of Canberra MRT and Canberra Plaza with the linkbridges shown (from HDB Exhibition) (facing north).jpg
- File:Overview of Canberra MRT and Canberra Plaza with the linkbridges shown (from HDB Exhibition) (top).jpg
- File:Picture of Canberra MRT and Canberra Plaza Model.jpg
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
if you deemed so feel free to delete. no objections Quek157 (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
but can I upload on en-wiki? Quek157 (talk) 21:07, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
After reading Copyright Act, Current version as at 28 Apr 2018, Singapore,
Buildings and models of buildings 64. The copyright in a building or a model of a building is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the building or model or by the inclusion of the building or model in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast. [Aust. 1968, s. 66]
read in conjunction with
Publication (3) For the purposes of this Act — (a) the performance of a literary, dramatic or musical work; (b) the supplying (whether by sale or otherwise) to the public of records of a literary, dramatic or musical work; (c) the exhibition of an artistic work; (d) the construction of a building or of a model of a building; or (e) the supplying (whether by sale or otherwise) to the public of photographs or engravings of a building, of a model of a building or of a sculpture, shall not constitute publication of the work.
(https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/CA1987) COPYRIGHT ACT (CHAPTER 63) (Original Enactment: Act 2 of 1987)
REVISED EDITION 2006 (31st January 2006)
Conclusion: The derivative rights seems not to be applicable. I'm not a lawyer but these seems to be reasonable grounds for it to be kept
--Quek157 (talk) 10:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn by nom. As far as I know, the Singapore law is the only one that makes an exception for models of buildings. I learn something every day here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)