Commons:Deletion requests/Image:ZosCentral.jpg
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.
Copied from an archive, author unknown, archive allows only non-commercial use (not that this matters, the archive is very likely not the copyright holder) --88.134.44.28 16:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- As I wrote on the image's page: The photograph is in the "archive of construction history of the town of Zurich" (BAZ) where every one can go and use the items there for free. citation from the archiv's home page (http://www.stadt-zuerich.ch/internet/hbd/home/erinnern/baugeschichtliches_archiv.html) on january 17th, 2007: "Das Angebot steht Mitarbeitenden der Stadtverwaltung und der Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung. Die Benutzung der Bestände und die Beratung im Haus sind kostenlos." (german for: The collection is avaible for employes from municipal adminnistration services and the public. The use of the items and counselling is for free.) In fact, as a regulary user of this archive: you have to pay the cost for the reproduction (e.g. 0.20 Fr. for a photocopy), but you can also thake photgraphs without flash, etc. with no costs.
- Copyright and copyright holder: most of the items in the BAZ archive are photographs taken by officials from the town exactly for this archive who tells about changing from the town since 1877. The copyright of this photograph was by ZOS Tramway Company until take over trough Municipal Tramway Company, a branch of the town of Zurich, now and here represented by the BAZ archive, a branch of the municipal archive, a branch of the town of Zurich.
- furthermore there are are lot of commercial products using photographs from the BAZ archiv and they mention always "BAZ" as source or if the name of the photographer is known "name/BAZ". for ex. books from "Orell Füssli" or "Neue Zürcher Zeitung". In 2000 I published a small book with two or three photographs from them and they asked only to give them one book for their library and one for the archiv.--Eruedin 11:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- All right. First, "kostenlos" is "free as in beer", not "free as in libre". Commons wants libre. Second: given the provenance you cited (ZOS, takeover by ZVV or whatever it's called these days, in any case an official branch of the city administration, to which the archive also belongs), we may assume that the archive indeed holds the (economic) rights on that image. Hence their non-commercial-only claim does hold, which makes the image non-free. However, given that you've already dealt with this archive and had no problems getting permission to use images, why don't you just ask them whether they'd release it under {{CC-BY-SA-2.5}}, with attribution to the archive? Maybe they can even tell you who took the image back in the 1920s/1930s (my guess). Otherwise, I'm afraid this would have to be deleted. Lupo 12:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- It's called VBZ (ZVV it's only the collective marketing and ticket selling organisation). OK, I will go over there next week (it's just round corner from my job, but now it's to late and friday, I'm not in town. So I will check it with them. {{CC-BY-SA-2.5}} seems to be wath they ask usually. I will post my answer as soon as possible. --Eruedin 18:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- All right. First, "kostenlos" is "free as in beer", not "free as in libre". Commons wants libre. Second: given the provenance you cited (ZOS, takeover by ZVV or whatever it's called these days, in any case an official branch of the city administration, to which the archive also belongs), we may assume that the archive indeed holds the (economic) rights on that image. Hence their non-commercial-only claim does hold, which makes the image non-free. However, given that you've already dealt with this archive and had no problems getting permission to use images, why don't you just ask them whether they'd release it under {{CC-BY-SA-2.5}}, with attribution to the archive? Maybe they can even tell you who took the image back in the 1920s/1930s (my guess). Otherwise, I'm afraid this would have to be deleted. Lupo 12:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
deleted (not used, no answer since January) --ALE! ¿…? 21:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
