Commons:Deletion requests/File:Atomium.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.

File:Atomium (Jun 2009).jpg (previously under filename "File:Atomium.jpg")

[edit]

The Atomium is © SABAM on behalf of Waterkeyn's heirs. The photo violates COM:FOP#Belgium 67.87.46.39 19:12, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Atomium is © Waterkeyn's heirs. SABAM only helps the heirs enforcing the copyright.  Delete as the Atomium is copyrighted. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 04:10, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Atomium (2014-08-26).jpg (previously under filename "File:Atomium.jpg")

[edit]

Hola. El motivo es porque no sabía esto: y no quiero incurrir en una falta. Chicmusic (talk) 08:25, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Uploader request; see Category:Atomium for details on the sculptures copyright. --Martin H. (talk) 13:07, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Illustration of parts of Atomium.jpg (previously under filename "File:Atomium.jpg")

[edit]

COM:FOP#Belgium. In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Belgium. 84.61.168.23 19:23, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You should not necessarily just consider the copyright laws of Belgium. --Agamemnus (talk) 20:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

--- Deleted: I read the discussion on VP. According to OUR rules, the photo has to be free in Belgium as well. Currently the Atomium is off limits for Commons. Change the rules and I am happy to restore ALL Atomium pictures we deleted. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:22, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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:Atomium (image de synthèse).jpg (previously under filename "File:Atomium.jpg")

[edit]

There is no freedom of panorama in Belgium, this image is therefore a copyright infringement (as was the case in other DRs of images with the same filename listed above). ColonialGrid (talk) 17:47, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

it's a draw, an image made from scratch, are you really sure this is supposed to be deleted? Any representation of the atomium had to follow the same way in this case--Madelgarius (talk) 17:54, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
so you will have to delete all the pictures around the atomium from all the wikipedias... I agree--Madelgarius (talk) 18:21, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • this one
    this one
  • this one
    this one
  • and even this one
    and even this one
So in the first Picture at Minimundus there's no copyright-violation. Because the modell is in a public entertainment park in Austria - so Austrian Law ist guilty, and not the Belgium. It's a permanent artwork in Austria, so it's possible to take and publish pictures, whenever you want. @ColonialGrid: Please inform about laws in different countries. --Austriantraveler (talk) 20:03, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My picture was made from scratch, as the miniature from Austria... This do not botter the freedom of panorama, and if it's considered as a derivative work (despite the fact that i'm not doing "art" but simply trying to illustrate an article by a "simply picture") the one you are speaking about is also derivated from the atomium, no? --Madelgarius (talk) 21:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commons requires all images to be PD or properly licenced with a free licence is both the country of creation and the US. The miniature replica is ok because the image is not a copyright infringement in the country it was created in (Austria) and the US (DR discussions here and here). The road sign states that it is acceptable as it is part of Belgium law, and the silhouette has been subjected to a DR and kept. The primary difference between the replica and your image is country of creation: the replica was made in Austria which does have FOP, your image was likely created in Belgium (where you are located) which doesn't. ColonialGrid (talk) 06:31, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • If I was an Austrian it would be ok? What if I told you that the model for making my 3D picture was the replica from Minimundus and not effectively the Atomium? I insist again this is a simply picture (no details at all, just nine spheres in a cube, some virtual spotlights, 2-3 stars and a bit of photographic grain. Don't try to rebuild the Atomium with this poor illustration ;-). --Madelgarius (talk) 07:53, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • we will say you did it ;-) You can delete, we will wait until european sagacity could make a difference between facebook and wikimedia projects. We will wait until Belgium will do so. Thank you for your patient replies (still not convinced about all you said (as you do probably)) enough wasted time here ;-)--Madelgarius (talk) 12:25, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, no. According to the Berne Convention, the country of first publication is what matters. Until now, that's the rule we apply here. Although we can't allow a picture of the original in Belgium, I think we could allow this. The country of first publication is the USA in this case. I don't think there could be a copyright of the design. As explained here, it is the shape of a unit cell of an iron crystal. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: I think we could allow this. The country of first publication is the USA in this case. I don't think there could be a copyright of the design. As explained here, it is the shape of a unit cell of an iron crystal. Yann (talk) 10:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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:Atomium (image de synthèse).jpg (previously under filename "File:Atomium.jpg")

[edit]

This does not respect one condition of the Belgian FOP: "provided that the reproduction or the communication of the work is as it is found there". BrightRaven (talk) 08:43, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@BrightRaven: L'image avait été conservée quant il n'y avait pas de liberté de panorama en Belgique (cf. supra) et maintenant qu'il y en a une, elle doit être supprimée parce qu'elle enfreindrait la FOP. Croquignolesque, non? --Madelgarius (talk) 09:21, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Je pense qu'elle n'aurait pas due être conservée quand il n'y avait pas de FOP en Belgique : c'est une œuvre dérivée (ce n'est pas une modélisation d'un cristal de fer, mais bien de l'Atomium, car un cristal de fer n'a pas de pavillon d'accueil à sa base ou de piliers de soutien) et l'autorisation de l'auteur de l’œuvre d'origine était nécessaire. La FOP belge actuelle interdit clairement ce type d’œuvre dérivée : elle ne permet que de montrer l’œuvre dans son contexte "public", pas d'en faire des reproductions avec d'autres média. BrightRaven (talk) 09:37, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Belote rebelote et 10 de der. Les trois vignettes ci-dessus doivent également être supprimées (y compris la réplique de l'Atomium à Minimundus) en tant que travaux dérivés de l'atomium... Ou alors la pauvre image de synthèse qui représente la réplique de l'atomium de minimundus et qui a illustré l'article sur WP pendant plus d'un an sous cette appellation peut-être conservée pour ce qu'elle est (puis en souvenir du message qu'elle portait) --Madelgarius (talk) 12:00, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
La différence, c'est qu'on peut raisonnablement supposer que les copies présentes à Minimundus ou ailleurs ont été faites avec l'accord de l'architecte de l'Atomium. Sans cet accord, toute copie d'une œuvre est interdite (c'est l'essence même du copyright). BrightRaven (talk) 08:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ravi d'en revenir à l'essence, à l'esprit, je vous y suit entièrement. Cette pauvre image de synthèse n'est pas un oeuvre dérivée parce que ce n'est pas une oeuvre du tout c'est juste une petite illustration comme il en fut de la Tour Eiffel, depuis le début et qu'on ne peut empêcher que des bâtiments symboliques comme la Tour Eiffel, le Golden Gate, Big Ben et... l'Atomium soient repris dans des illustrations. Si c'est à des fins non commerciales, informatives, patrimoniales (éléments qui constituent des exceptions au droit d'auteur en Belgique), je n'y vois pas d'inconvénient. Mais j'entends bien qu'il est important pour vous d'obtenir la suppression de cette image pour célébrer sans doute la FOP en Belgique en en ayant une lecture rigoriste. Le monde n'en sera que meilleur si les lois et règlement sont correctement appliqués. Ne pensez vous pas que le discernement doit rester cependant de mise partant du fait que c'est celui-là même qui nous permet de créer des réglementations. Un débat a déjà été tenu par rapport à cette image et elle a été conservée. Aujourd'hui vous réouvrez ce débat, parce que vous n'étiez pas d'accord avec la première discussion... C'est le moment de faire usage de votre discernement. --Madelgarius (talk) 10:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: If somehow Belgian FOP does not allow derivative work, then we will need to have a closer look at this in general, because that would make Belgian FOP incompatible with our license requirements. --Jcb (talk) 15:25, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Atomium.jpg&oldid=583275760"