A few weeks ago, visiting a friend in London, I did the usual quick
round of museums; when at the Imperial War Museum, I took a pile of
photographs of various exhibits. I put them on flickr, and made a
mental note to put them on Commons at some point. Of course, what with
one thing and another, I never got round to it.
Since then, someone's transferred several over to be used as
illustrations for a handful of enwp articles, used one as the basis
for writing another article entirely, and left me a very nice note to
explain this...
I can't help but shake the feeling that our system *works* :-)
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk
It is not safe to assume pictures are PD after 100 years. It is not safe
because a general statistic about the life expectancy of the total
population is just that: general. It for example includes the high child
mortality of that time. Four people, two getting 10 years old, two getting
90 years old, the average is 50 years. Who of those four will have created
material that fits the scope of Commons? Everything those two 90 year old
people did before they got 60, will get into public domain too early with a
100-year-rule.
At the village pump I have published a small statistic based on all people
who died 1907 and have an article at German Wikipedia. 75% of those people
got over Yanns 55 years (56 and higher). For two of them a 100-year-rule
would mean, that their first pictures/books would have been put into PD by
us 34 years after their death (but luckily we did know their lifedates, so
it did not happen).
Sorry but that is not acceptable. Just because we would like to put their
works under public domain we can't expect them to be dead within 30 years
after they did that work. This is life and not some general statistic. And
life is not safe or easy to assume. You are dealing with people and their
rights and that does not give you the right to create your own rules based
on some general number.
Cecil
For checking it yourself, the total list of people:
http://www.biketraveler.net/urs/1907.htm
Villagepump-entry:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump&diff=…
Yann
you're right about some acceptation of copyrighted works...
To answer to Cary Bass, there're some examples in New York streets
categories... I don't think that the architect of Apple store or some
recents buildings are already dead... so it's a form of acceptation
(reagarding fench law)
you're right also about the delay ... 70 years after the 1st january
following the dead of the author...
(source<http://www.avocats-publishing.com/La-duree-de-la-protection-des>)
I Made a confusion with the american law before 1998 ...
So I'm agree with you, the deletion seems to be a little too reprehensive
regarding some accepation and the law.
I also note that there were very few person involve in this deletion
request.
Sincerely
Gdgourou
Hello,
Recently a photo of Alain-Fournier from 1904 was deleted because "no
proof of PD" [1]. I don't understand the rationale being this decision.
AFAIK, we have accepted such images upto now, why do we refuse them now?
I think we need to get this clear once and for all.
Seeing what was the life expectancy 100 years ago (about 50-55 years in
USA / Europe [2] [3]), a limit of 100 years seems reasonable to me. The
figures I found are actually lower than I expected (60 years).
While we accept a lot of content which is much less safe than this, it
seems unreasonable to me to refuse this kind of images. It is in the
public domain in USA anyway.
Rocket000 said [4] "I think it's very safe to assume it's PD or can be
treated like it is, but that's different than allowing it on Commons."
That's exactly the point: if it is very safe to assume it's PD, why
should we refuse them? Why setting different standards? This goes
against our mission.
Regards,
Yann
[1]
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:Alain_fou…
[2] http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html
[3] http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/55/6/1196S.pdf
[4]
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#100_years_old_images
--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikisource.org/ | Bibliothèque libre
http://wikilivres.info | Documents libres
I spoke with Jane Akre of Injuryboard.com who was calling to ask what
"personality rights" were. It seems she's reusing a substantial number
of our images for her site.
She understands a bit about CC licensing (but didn't know the difference
between Wikimedia Commons and Creative Commons). I pointed her in a few
directions.
It was a fairly good conversation overall.
--
Cary Bass
Volunteer Coordinator
Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running! Support the Wikimedia
Foundation today: http://donate.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Phone: 415.839.6885
Fax: 415.882.0495
E-Mail: cary(a)wikimedia.org
Right now there are 1,300 images in [[Category:Images from Library and
Archives Canada]]. While many are PD, many others have been tagged as
{{CopyrightedFreeUse}} due to some ambiguous language on the LAC website.
Last fall I emailed them to ask about this, and they finally replied - turns
out my suspicion was correct, and our current use violates their license.
Is there someone I should be forwarding this to? Assuming they are right,
some mass deletions are in order. Curiously, they also seem to be asserting
control over those images which are now PD.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Copyright /droit_d'auteur
<copyright/droit_d'auteur(a)lac-bac.gc.ca<droit_d%27auteur(a)lac-bac.gc.ca>
>
Date: 2008/5/4
Subject: Images on Wikepedia Website
To:
Cc: Copyright /droit_d'auteur
<copyright/droit_d'auteur(a)lac-bac.gc.ca<droit_d%27auteur(a)lac-bac.gc.ca>
>
Dear Mr. Ryan,
Your request for information concerning the possibility to upload Library
and Archives Canada images on the Wikipedia website has been referred to my
attention. I had previously been contacted by another representative of
your website and am answering your request along the same lines as that
provided to Mr. Harden on October 22, 2007. I believed that both your
requests were related and therefore initially answered only Mr. Harden.
However, to close the query in our system, I am providing an independent
reply to your query as well.
I have reviewed the Wikipedia website to determine the type of permissions
which are granted to your users for material which is posted on your
website. The terms of re-use of material which appears on your website,
specifically granting permission to modify or create derivative products,
does not meet our criteria to ensure that the authenticity of the original
material which comes from our collections is retained. Additionally, the
terms of re-use on your website state that the material can be copied and
distributed directly from your website. Library and Archives Canada
requires that we be contacted for any re-use of our original material and we
supply the copies of the material to ensure that the authenticity is
retained. This is achieved by licensing on a "one-time" use only. Any
subsequent use or re-use of our material is subject to a separate license.
We are in the process of attempting to have material from our collections
removed from your website which had been licensed for a specific purpose,
which did not include posting on your website. Our material which is posted
on your website is being advertised as having no restrictions, when in fact,
there are restrictions with all our licenses, especially concerning
modification and re-distribution. The various disclaimers posted on your
website, relieving Wikipedia of such activities by its contributors, leads
us to believe that no remedial action can be taken by Wikipedia in such
instances. Taking all these factors into consideration, we are therefore
not in a position to encourage posting of material from our collections on
the Wikipedia website at this time. Should the terms of use on your website
be modified, we would then re-examine this request and reconsider the
possibility of granting a permission.
Should you have any questions with respect to this request, please do not
hesitate to contact me directly.
Sincerely,
Thank you,
*****Carole Cloutier*
A/Manager
Copyright Bureau, Services Branch
Library and Archives Canada
Tel: 613-992-2567 / Fax: 613-996-1341
Email: copyright/droit_d'auteur(a)lac-bac.gc.ca<droit_d%27auteur(a)lac-bac.gc.ca>
Website: www.collectionscanada.ca
--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Padraichttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Padraichttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Padraichttp://wikitravel.org/en/User:Padraic
