Commons:Deletion requests/File:Donald Trump attacks Judge (20170204-0512).png

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.

File:Donald Trump attacks Judge (20170204-0512).png

[edit]

The deletion request applies also to:

Images in the tweet are arguable not in the public domain. D. Trump's personal account is not his official account and therefore, cannot be deemed as "part of his personal duties". The picture in the D. Trump profile has an unknown copyright status and the fact that Trump becomes the POTUS does not make his previous works being in the public domain. Finall, the pictures in the 'like' bar are not, for sure, in the public domain. IMHO, the pictures in the tweet should be removed as they're not in the public domain Discasto talk 16:03, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anything done by Donald Trump is in the Public Domain as he is the President of the United States, all presidential records created, regardless of format are preserved under the w:Federal Records Act. Jasonanaggie (talk) 16:07, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As I've mentioned, Donald Trump's portrait is previous to his tenure as POTUS. Therefore, it's not in the public domain. --Discasto talk 16:10, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That does not matter, he is using it as an official means of communication, it is in the public domain and is currently covered under the FRA, the FRA covers the pictures of those who have used their images to endorse the statement as well, you can read about this type of surrender of your right to your image when it is in reference to the FRA on Governmental Websites which state anything you say is covered under the FRA. This is completely within the public domain. It was the president who took the unorthodox step to use Twitter in his official capacity. Jasonanaggie (talk) 16:20, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
While I'd like the image to remain as-is, the issue might actually be the small profile pictures below, and not the less-debatable remainder of the screenshot. -- Gohnarch░ 18:09, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, well would it reach consensus if I blurred (or pixelate) the smaller images in the tweet and re upload it as an alternative version of it which will be used on wikipedia pages? Jasonanaggie (talk) 18:42, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since only material made by the federal gov. or employees of the fed.gov. as part of their official duties are "forced" to become public domain, images of him, are not copyrighted by him, (unless work-for-hire, but that does not mean it was part of official duty then). If this image was taken by a photographer (or himself) before he became an employee (or employer in this case?) of the federalgovernment, he is allowed to hold copyright of it. The law does not say that employees can't own copyright, only that if they made a work as part o their official duty, it will automatically enter the public doamin, which this profile picter does not seem to "do". This was his profile image before he was elected (http://wayback.archive.org/web/20160801080151/https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump), therefore not made during his employement. (t) Josve05a (c) 21:36, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was his decision to continue to use this image and therefore gave up any claim to it; the presidency is not a part-time job, anything created by the president in his communication with the world is in the public domain, including his image. Jasonanaggie (talk) 22:04, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
... an image that he hasn't "created", as president, but before. --Discasto talk 22:07, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Again, it does not matter, when he uses it in his official capacity as President, he loses all rights to it and voids it into the public domain. Law is very clear here. If he wanted to maintain any copyright to this very insignificant image, he should have never used it after 11:59 20 January 2017. He continued to use it and it therefore belongs to the public. Jasonanaggie (talk) 01:37, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I couldn't have said it better. Jasonanaggie (talk) 09:27, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Unfortunately, we have rules (which are better that opinions):
'Copyrighted work X is a key part of the subject [..]. Removing it would make the derivative work radically different, but potentially still useful: Very unlikely. --Discasto talk 22:50, 5 February 2017 (UTC) PS: if the text is that important, no need to have it in an image, isn't it? --Discasto talk 22:50, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The image is necessary for it verifiability and authenticity. It also is in the Public Domain, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Records_Act Jasonanaggie (talk) 02:06, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Your talk about "verifiability and authenticity" smells of "fair use". Well, we don't accept fair use here. And yes, I've read the link you provide and, well, says anything about this subtle case. Please, provide arguments better than "it's so because I say it" --Discasto talk 11:01, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but in the future, if is not from the official @POTUS or @Whitehouse, blur the images from those that liked it as well as Trump's image (Since that image itself is not under a free licence) but keep the rest, since those comments were made publicly, they are on record and thus cannot be copyrighted..yeah when WMF made some of its laws, we did not consider social media as an avenue, we should now. We only blur those sections for which copyright is under question.--Stemoc 00:56, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. As far as the copyright issue goes, the tweets don't seem to be within President Trump's scope of employment, so {{PD-USGov}} doesn't apply. However, one could argue that the tweets are so short that they do not meet the originality requirement to be copyrightable. Notwithstanding this, I think the tweets are out-of-scope (out-of-score works include "Files that contain nothing educational other than raw text. Purely textual material such as plain-text versions of recipes, lists of instructions, poetry, fiction, quotations, dictionary definitions, lesson plans or classroom material, and the like are better hosted elsewhere, for example at Wikibooks, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, Wikiversity or Wikisource.") and should be deleted for that reason. Although there is an allowance for "files which embody something of value over and above raw text. For example, files consisting of scans of out-of-copyright books, newspapers and the like which preserve original font, layout, embedded images and the like are within scope", I don't think the non-copyrightable portion of Twitter's UI makes the file within scope. RJaguar3 (talk) 06:00, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The photo of Trump is not very relevant, as that is de minimis. He is using twitter as part of achieving his goals in his job - the text is public domain. However, this is a screenshot of Twitter website UI, which unless proven otherwise is copyright to Twitter. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:02, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Done by Jcb already, just maintenance-closing. --James F. (talk) 23:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Donald_Trump_attacks_Judge_(20170204-0512).png&oldid=234387785"