Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models

Add {{delete|reason=Fill in reason for deletion here!|subpage=Qatar 2022 stadium models|year=2025|month=January|day=13}} to the description page of each file.
Notify the uploader(s) with {{subst:idw||Qatar 2022 stadium models|plural}} ~~~~
Add {{Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models}} at the end of today's log.

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.

Qatar 2022 stadium models

Superceding the literal dozen or so deletion discussions created by A1Cafel, which severely fractured the discussion on this series of images. The primary concern deals with freedom of panorama; more specifically freedom of panorama in Qatar and Hong Kong. This series of photographs depicts scale models of the stadiums of the 2022 FIFA World Cup, which were on public display in Hong Kong. Per COM:FOP Hong Kong, images of "3D works" are permitted as long as they are "permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public". This may not apply here, as these models are allegedly part of a temporary exhibition. Additionally complicating things is the fact that these models are derived from architectural works which, per COM:FOP Qatar, are copyright protected under Qatari law.

Perhaps the original creator of these images, SUAXINGPWOO Kaliu, can provide more details about the exhibition these models were showcased at. Seeking opinions from Adeletron 3030, Brianjd, and Lee Vilenski as participants in the preceding discussions, and also seeking opinions from Amakuru, Didym, Krd, and Tvx1, who participated in similar deletion discussions over Qatar 2022 stadium images uploaded to Commons. — AFC Vixen (talk) 08:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AFC Vixen COM:FOP Qatar is not directly relevant to these photos. It might be relevant to the models, if the models were created in Qatar. But what little FoP Qatar has is unlikely to apply to the models anyway.

Other Qatari copyright laws, such as threshold of originality and copyright terms, are relevant to the architecture (and therefore the models and photos, to the extent that they derive from the architecture). But there is no need to discuss the details here: it is clear that this architecture is non-free (and will be for a long time). And this means that any separate copyright in the models is a moot point.

So the only issue left to discuss is COM:FOP Hong Kong. If such FoP is available, then it should apply to these models, even though they are derivative works; I have never seen an FoP case where such derivative works were an issue. But is such FoP available? The key question is whether this is a permanent exhibition, but I know nothing about this exhibition. Brianjd (talk) 12:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If someone more knowledgeable than me can back up this analysis, then we should remove this DR from the Qatari FOP category. Brianjd (talk) 12:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really knowledgeable as such, but surely the point of a FOP ban is that in those countries the architectural work itself, and images thereof, is copyrightable. I'd have thought therefore, that scale models of the work fall under the same umbrella - the model is a derivative of the original stadium and therefore subject to the same copyright laws as govern the original? Amakuru (talk) 16:57, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does Qatari FoP law apply in Hong Kong? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:30, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru Your first sentence contains a misunderstanding of FoP that I recently saw in another discussion, so I want to correct it. The lack of FoP does not mean that works are copyrighted. It just means that if the works are copyrighted (which they happen to be in this case), then reproducing (etc) those works requires permission.

Your second sentence is basically correct: the models are derivatives of the architecture and therefore subject to the same copyright laws as the architecture. Actually, we should say that the models are subject to at least the same laws as the architecture – maybe more, as the models may have their own copyright.

@Ikan Kekek I say ‘no’. I have never seen an FoP case that referred to the country of origin of the relevant work. Why should this case be any different? Brianjd (talk) 10:53, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Brianjd: thanks for clarifying and correcting my error. Just as a matter of interest, if there's a country A which lacks FOP and another country B across the border where there is FOP, am I allowed to take pictures of copyrighted structures in country A while I'm standing in country B? Because the laws I must follow are those in the country where my derivative is created... It seems like creating a model of a Qatari stadium in Hong Kong is a similar case. If Qatar doesn't allow reproductions of their 3D art anywhere then it might be subject to that. Or perhaps it's fine, because the work created in HK isn't covered by Qatari law, only HK and US law needs to be satisfied...? Amakuru (talk) 11:07, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru I’ll just give this quick response for now: I’m assuming that the models were created with permission, so FoP is irrelevant there. Brianjd (talk) 11:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru When standing in country B (with FoP), you should be allowed to take photos of copyrighted structures in country A. Regarding Qatari copyrights, strictly speaking, Qatari law applies only in Qatar. But countries generally respect each other’s copyrights (this is required by the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, whose parties include Qatar and Hong Kong). So work created in Hong Kong is subject only to Hong Kong law, but in this case, it is indirectly subject to Qatari law as well. But not US law. That only applies when it comes to uploading media to Commons. Brianjd (talk) 13:05, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, Qatari law should not apply here. FoP is an explicit exception to copyright, where anyone is allowed to freely reproduce a publicly visible work (under varying conditions) without permission. In practice, FoP pretty much never applies to 3D models. So either this 3D model is itself a copyvio made without the architects' permission, or more likely it was made with permission, and once the architects allow it to be placed in HK then only HK law applies. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:43, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm not mistaken, many pictures of 3D models on exhibit have been deleted because of FoP concerns. If those are misplaced, all such photos should be undeleted, as models on exhibit in places like museums or government buildings would not have been made and exhibited in violation of architects' copyrights. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikan Kekek: I think a key point is whether those 3D models are considered permanently placed and/or publicly visible/outdoors in countries that have those requirements. Do you have any examples of DRs I can look at? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:22, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not off-hand, but I'll try to remember your remarks the next time I see one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have established that this is not a Qatari FoP issue. I have removed that category. Brianjd (talk) 03:31, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - models of this sort are almost always part of temporary exhibits. If we get evidence that they are permanently displayed, then they would be allowed by COM:FOP HK. -M.nelson (talk) 11:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 04:21, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models

Qatar 2022 stadium models

Navigation menu

Search