Commons:Deletion requests/File:Front de Libération de la Bretagne.jpg

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.

This logo is not simple enough in order to be in the public domain High Contrast (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually i made this logo [based on the original one], so i'm changing the licence to "own". - Dzlinker (talk) 00:22, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That would make it a derivative instead of just own work. Jcb (talk) 20:29, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Delete So it is just a a derivative work, or not? --High Contrast (talk) 01:04, 4 May 2013 (UTC) (Note to closing sysop: This !voter is the nominator. I hope that this note avoids any confusion)[reply]

 Delete I agree with the nominator. Sarah (talk) 18:12, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep It is too simple. BTW High Contrast, as the nominator you don't get to vote twice. Fry1989 eh? 18:12, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You must learn: DRs are no votings. --High Contrast (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And you should learn that as the nominator you do not get to say "delete" twice, that is a very clear obvious policy. Of course I don't mean "vote" in the literal sense like an election, there is no difference between "!vote" and "vote" in the context of which I use the word. You don't get to have your say twice. This has been rehashed multiple times. Fry1989 eh? 18:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No edit wars. Accept it. --High Contrast (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
O.k. guys, as both of you have said more than enough in this DR, stay away from it, please. I have asked an experienced French-native colleague (and eventually will encourage others) to give an informed opinion whether such work is copyrighted or copyrightable per jurisdiction of France, where it had been originally created. --Túrelio (talk) 20:04, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support in answering the initial question. But I must point out that I will not get out of this discussion. I will post comments here as if it could be usefule. Who is that collegue? --High Contrast (talk) 20:08, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If have asked Yann, Pierre and Jean-Frédéric now. --Túrelio (talk) 20:10, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. One them can surely help. --High Contrast (talk) 20:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete - Threshold_of_originality#France seems to be quite low, so this will be over it. The GNU and CC licenses currently present at the image description page seem to come out of the blue. Jcb (talk) 20:29, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • French law does not define any threshold of originality: any creation of mind is copyrighted. The jurisprudence defines a very low threshold of originality (threshold on whether the creation is original enought to be the imprint of the personality of the author). If you can read french I suggest to read this [1]. To come back to this drawing, I'm pretty sure a judge will find it original enought for droit d'auteur. For me it's a  Delete. PierreSelim (talk) 20:32, 16 May 2013 (UTC) PS: there is a very short summary here Commons:TOO#France. --PierreSelim (talk) 20:38, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: I was brought here from COM:AN/U so it's best to close this down now. It's a clear delete as per Jcb and PierreSelim russavia (talk) 21:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]