Commons:Deletion requests/Signatures of Chinese people

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.
  • Add {{delete|reason=Fill in reason for deletion here!|subpage=Signatures of Chinese people|year=2024|month=December|day=02}} to the description page of each file.
  • Notify the uploader(s) with {{subst:idw||Signatures of Chinese people|plural}} ~~~~
  • Add {{Commons:Deletion requests/Signatures of Chinese people}} at the end of today's log.

Signatures of Chinese people

[edit]

China (Mainland)

[edit]

All these signatures listed below were by people from China (P. R. China / Mainland). See: COM:SIG#China, People's Republic of, they are copyright protected by law thus cannot be kept here on Commons, unless replaced by those from official documents, or gained the permission of their authors.

Some other note for File:Mao Zedong Signature.svg (User talk:WikiLaurent#Signatures): Mao's typical calligraphy was semi-cursive script and cursive script. That revision is not typical and a bit askew. And also Mao hadn't signed with traditional Chinese since maybe 1950s, he was one of whom decided to choose simplified Chinese as the standard official writing system in PR China. Most of all, we care about the copyright issue. So, I have plenty of reasons not to use that one.
I have reviewed the source (JPG) for this revision, it is not a "document[s] of legislative, administrative and judicial nature", but a epigraph, an inscription. It reads: "No. 1 Automobile Factory foundation memorial. Mao Zedong". --Tomchen1989 (talk) 19:37, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that a signature fails to be kept at Wikimedia Commons may still be able to be uploaded to Wikipedia projects as a fair use.

Added another 2 in the list above: File:Hua Guofeng Signature.svg and File:Deng Xiaoping Sign.png. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 11:27, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Added File:Mao Zedong Sign.svg. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 08:54, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan

[edit]

These signatures listed below were by people from Taiwan (R. O. China). Like the laws of the P. R. China but different from US laws, I found no way to regard them in the public domain. The calligraphy works are protected in East Asia.

Some other note for File:Chiang Kaishek Signature.svg (User talk:WikiLaurent#Signatures): Besides the copyright issue, this revision looks better than the previous one IMO.
I have also reviewed the source (JPG) for this revision. It is definitely not an official document. Just a signature, using an irregular ink brush, with a printed "The President of the Republic of China", no any other text. And a "© Gallery of history, Inc" watermark is on the photo. I'm even doubting if that was signed by Chiang himself. So why not use File:Ratification of the Peace treaty between R. O. China and Japan.jpg? It is obviously a well-known and influential document with a better looking signature of Chiang on it. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 19:37, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Solved

[edit]

The problem for these signatures were solved, deriving from PD images. Please just delete the raster and copyrighted signature images of Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai-shek listed above.

--Tomchen1989 (talk) 22:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But to admin: A deletion of the historical versions of File:Mao Zedong Signature.svg and File:Chiang Kaishek Signature.svg is requested due to the same copyright problem explained above. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 08:59, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't post to my talk page as I can't access it right now. I'm watching this page so if you want you can post here. The Mao signature comes from a document of administrative nature since it was written to inaugurate the new factory. Your points about the Chiang Kaishek signature are irrelevant since, again, the PRC's laws are not the ROC's laws. Beside, the PRC law you are quoting states that a signature may be considered calligraphy works. In my opinion, this is meant to cover actual calligraphy works by artists. For regular signatures where there's no artistic intent, there's no copyright issue. Laurent (talk) 17:18, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please could you point me to the English text of the copyright law you are referring to? I can't see anything about signatures or calligraphy in the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (2010) Laurent (talk) 17:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For the PRC, plz read again the COM:SIG#China, People's Republic of. Does it state word for word that "a signature is copyrighted" in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 c. 48? No, but it doesn't mean a signature is not copyrighted in UK. For Taiwan (ROC), I just want to ask, what is a precautionary principle? Why File:Hu Yaobang Sign.png was deleted here before the compilation of COM:SIG#China, People's Republic of? I think I have pretty clearly explained. Since you intent to keep your copyrighted images, I uploaded the new ones with some other names: File:Mao Zedong Signature.svg, File:Chiang Kaishek Signature.svg, and your images are included in the list of the deletion requests and up to our discussion. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 19:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I see that you are extending the edit war to Wikipedia. Could you please wait until the end of the deletion request before unilaterally making all these changes all over Wikipedia? I really get the feeling that you have no ground for all these changes. Your interpretation of the PRC copyright laws are dubious at best and you didn't provide any third party sources to support your point of view. Laurent (talk) 19:52, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We try our best to prevent from the copyright vio, so I replaced'em. I've expained a thousand times that I'm not interpreting the PRC copyright laws on ROC issue, but the policy precautionary principle's there. Is this policy from PRChina? I am a fan of CJK fonts and concern these copyright issues of typefaces, I'm the main editor of en:List of CJK fonts, en:WenQuanYi and the taiwanese type foundry en:Arphic Technology. I really know some cases in Taiwan, like Wang Hanzong who involved in copyright infringement with Arphic Technology for his "GPLed" fonts in 2005. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 20:16, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not about the copyright and other stuff, just for the looking: Do you really think File:Mao Zedong Signature.svg looks better than File:Mao Zedong signature.svg, File:Chiang Kaishek Signature.svg looks better than File:Chiang Kaishek signature.svg? As a native Chinese reader, I'd say not at all. Despite a lot of propaganda, sometimes Mao and Chiang's calligraphy are really ugly, and here, they, are. OK let's stop this nonsense and continue discussing the copyright. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 20:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could you try to get a third opinion on the copyright issue? Right now, all this discussion is based on your own interpretation of the Chinese copyright law so it would be useful to get other opinions. I'm no lawyer but as far as I can tell, there's no indication that signatures might be copyrighted.
Are you saying we should choose the ugly signatures on purpose? I disagree with this, I think we should choose the signature as it is when the author pay attention to it, as it better represents their "ideal" signature. In just the same way, we don't choose bad pictures to represent people on infoboxes. Laurent (talk) 03:37, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are completely mistaking my words. Yeah, maybe there r a lot of grammartical errors in my words, I'm very very sorry for such errors. I'm explaining. Actually, the sentences below:
“ Do you really think File:Mao Zedong Signature.svg looks better than File:Mao Zedong signature.svg, File:Chiang Kaishek Signature.svg looks better than File:Chiang Kaishek signature.svg? As a native Chinese reader, I'd say not at all. ”
means I questioned you: Do you really think your uploads look better than my uploads. And then, I, as a native Chinese reader, answered myself: No, they don't look better. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 07:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So, plz re-read my previous words, I meant, personally, the two uploaded by me are more typical, and look better, and came from more influential documents than yours. And, the two uploaded by you may be still copyrighted, but obviously not for my uploads.
But, actually I never ever said on Commons we should choose an ugly or a good-looking signature on purpose. In fact, if such signatures are allowed here, both ugly and beautiful signatures are kept. Although a signature is so ugly, not typical at all, and came from an official document but not so influential, it is kept here. Which one should be used in the article, that's the Wikipedia projects' choice.--Tomchen1989 (talk) 07:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Again please wait until this deletion request is finished before changing the pictures. So far, you haven't convinced anybody that there's any reason to change the signatures. Laurent (talk) 03:40, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm no lawyer neither. As you personally said below at the "Discussion" section, COM:SIG is just a proposed Commons guideline, policy, or process. Our policy is: precautionary principle, and you are evading talking about this real policy.
Look, if these signatures are kept here, should the deleted File:Hu Yaobang Sign.png be restored? I'm so confused. If the policy actually allows these signatures here, I would really enjoy to convert these raster image to SVGs, and upload lots more signatures here. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 07:14, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I don't discuss COM:PRP is that I feel it doesn't apply in this case. PRP applies when "there is significant doubt about the freedom of a particular file", however I have almost no doubt that the signatures can be used freely. In particular, in your interpretation, you quote article 14 but this article is about "works created by compilation" however a signature is not created by compilation. This article can give us a clue about what the PRC allows us to use on Wikipedia, but it doesn't tell use whether signatures are copyrighted or not. Then you quote article 4 from an old version of the copyright law, but this article no longer exists in the new one. Even if it did, it only applies to "plastic arts which impart aesthetic effect" - calligraphy, painting, sculpture, etc. but not signatures. But again the article no longer exists so it's irrelevant anyway. Is it possible to get a third opinion on this issue? Laurent (talk) 10:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am the contributor who pasted these laws on Wikisource, and I am pretty sure Regulations for the Implementation of the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (2002) is not an old version. The Regulations and the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China are two different parts, the 2002 version regulations is the latest regulations, while the 2010 version copyright law is the latest copyright law.
COM:PRP was applied on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hu Yaobang Sign.png, why shouldn't it be applied here? What is the difference between them? Regardless of the Dow Jones & Company case I mentioned in COM:SIG#China, People's Republic of, even if the law doesn't specifically tell whether signatures are copyrighted or not, they are automatically considered copyrighted per COM:PRP here.
You see I'm not stopping you from using them at Wikipedia, you can still use them at Wikipedia as fair use. The policy of the Commons is stricter than the policy of the Wikipedias, and the policy of the Wikpedias is stricter than the law. Actually no one sues you nor Commons if you uploaded these signatures here, Article 22 of the copyright law states that one can "appropriate quotation from a published work in one's own work for the purposes of introduction of, or comment on, a work, or demonstration of a point", but that is what we call "fair use" here, the policy of the Commons is so strict that you cannot upload fairly used things and you should at least transfer them to Wikipedia project to use them. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 11:45, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't notice that there was two different texts. You'll note however that article 4(8) refers to "plastic arts which impart aesthetic effect" and I don't think that includes signatures. The text actually mentions specifically many types of artworks and at not point does it mention signatures. All in all I understand your interpretation but I just don't agree with it. Perhaps we should wait till somebody else care to look at the issue? By the way, are there precedents where a Chinese signature has been considered a "plastic arts which impart aesthetic effect"? Laurent (talk) 14:51, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]

I thought all signatures were ineligible for copyright and therefore in the public domain? Also the page you are referring to is a proposed Commons guideline, policy, or process. Shouldn't we wait until it's accepted before we start mass deleting all the Chinese signatures on Commons? Laurent (talk) 15:22, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And I can't see anything about Taiwan at COM:SIG. The laws of the PRC are different from those of the ROC so I think we can already exclude the ROC signatures from this deletion request. Laurent (talk) 15:26, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is only a proposal, an essay. In fact, the section COM:SIG#China, People's Republic of was written by myself, feel free to correct if I was wrong. But, note that we are actually under a precautionary principle here. And there was a precedent for deletion of the signatures of people from P. R. China, see: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hu Yaobang Sign.png, it was deleted before the compilation of COM:SIG#China, People's Republic of.
COM:SIG#China, People's Republic of is absolutely not my reason for deleting File:Jay Chou signature.gif and File:Chiang Kai-shek Signature.png. But firstly, we have a precautionary principle and a precedent Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hu Yaobang Sign.png which was deleted according to such principle rather than COM:SIG. Secondly, as I said above, the copyright of calligraphy is treated stricter by the laws of East Asian countries than by the US law. There are a lot of professional calligraphers in East Asian, calligrapher's a job there.
I'm currently saving these signatures by searching the official documents signed by these polititians. I have already solved the problem for File:Mao Zedong Signature.svg, File:Chiang Kaishek Signature.svg, please Laurent, you can improve the work based on the document I uploaded (perhaps make them vertical as the original look, we can discuss here: File talk:Mao Zedong Signature.svg), but please do not revert them to the revisions copyrighted or with no source. If you insist to revert to your revision, than they would be included in this deletion list.
For File:Autograph of Luo Yonghao.PNG, File:Leung Maotao Signature.png, File:Wangdanqianming.jpg and File:Jay Chou signature.gif, it is also possible to email them, asking for the original authors' permissions. If we cannot gain the permission, they should be deleted. But again, as I said above, a signature fails to be kept at Wikimedia Commons may still be able to be uploaded to Wikipedia projects as a fair use.--Tomchen1989 (talk) 17:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. - for now, individual files can be nominated separately, see here - Jcb (talk) 23:28, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Signatures_of_Chinese_people&oldid=828714139"