Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 January 21

January 21

File:Luis M. Taruc Hukbalahap Monument1.jpg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no freedom of panorama in the Philippine copyright law. English Wikipedia cannot accept images of copyrighted monuments from countries with no FoP rights unless one image of the monument is converted to WP:Fair use for use on the article of the monument itself, not the articles of the persons or events the monument depicts. Per this article, the statue is very recent, unveiled in 2023 and authored by sculptor Josef Andre Canasa Layug. This is copyrighted and unfree for commercial Creative Commons licensing distribution. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Layug Taruc Hukbalahap sculpture will have a NHCP-National Museum historical marker forthcoming to be installed as required by R.A. No. 11961” (‘An Act Strengthening the Conservation and Protection of Philippine Cultural Heritage Through Cultural Mapping and An Enhanced Cultural Heritage Education Program, Amending for the Purpose Republic Act No. 10066, Otherwise Known as the “National Cultural Heritage Act of 2009”’, signed into law on 24 August 2023); San Luis town and Pampanga Province both have jurisdiction now to cover this sculpture - by required cultural mapping, since this is the only one and first in Philippine History that a Hukbalahap has been erected, as National Treasure of the Philippines or Important Cultural Property at the very least; for this reason, this Special law becomes an exception to the Copyright or no FOP law in the Philippines, with due respect to the young Layug sculptor;

I was assisted in this photography by my friend-secretary who, upon request by a sales broker bought a lot hereat Memorial Park; I was told that the owner of the Park commissioned the statue and informed us that the young sculptor waived his rights upon payment of the commission; the Provincial and local government also claims landmark historical rights, but the instant statue is privately owned by the Park owner; I was told that either the owner and or the sculptor will email me or Wikimedia Foundation owners regarding the matter; but for me, the shortest avenue to treat this is for the sculptor from Santa Ines, Guagua relative of Willy Layug, to issue an email to us or to Commons regarding permission if required by Wikipedia; a longer route is to ask for legal opinion from the Pampanga Provincial Legal Office regarding this legal matter on copyright. (Nota Bene just for reference 1 -In Commons, The Luis M. Taruc Freedom Park and Museum (Santo Tomas, San Luis, Pampanga) with sculpture therein the statue is very recent and authored by a sculptor; this is copyrighted and was long been treated as free for commercial Creative Commons licensing distribution; 2 Category:Gateway Tower (Cubao, Quezon City) was designed by the AC Redevelopment Design Group, in association of local architectural firm Palafox Associates by Filipino architect Felino Palafox and American architectural firm RTKL Associates and the Article Commons has the photos thereof) Done, very sincerely Valenzuela400 (talk) 06:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC).[reply]

@Valenzuela400 no, copyright is not magically waived just by the park paying fees to the sculptor. If you obtained this information from the park management, the management may have little knowledge on copyright law. Section 178.4 states (with some emphases): "In the case of a work commissioned by a person other than an employer of the author and who pays for it and the work is made in pursuance of the commission, the person who so commissioned the work shall have ownership of the work, but the copyright thereto shall remain with the creator, unless there is a written stipulation to the contrary." So, unless the park managements shows the document that clearly stated the copyright transfer from the sculptor to them, they have no evidence to back up their statement. But even then, this is just a copyright transfer; it means in this case, the copyright is just transfered to the park management, and the work is not in public domain. Commercial license permission from the ultimate copyright holder is what Wikimedia needs, not your or the park management's confusing interpretations of the copyright law regarding commissioned works. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless we have VRT confirmation that the sculpture is freely licensed. We are not privy to the contract between the park and the sculptor and so we cannot determine the copyright status of sculpture. In such cricumstance, we default to the sculpture being copyrighted unless we receive evidence to show otherwise. -- Whpq (talk) 04:45, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Sassa Gurl.jpeg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was uploaded as a non-free image, but later retagged by the uploader as CC-BY-SA. The image metadata suggests the image was copied from Facebook, so the CC-BY-SA claim needs further evidence. Lacking this, the image is a non-free image of a living person, so should be deleted as replaceable. John of Reading (talk) 15:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No evidence this image is under a free license. -- Whpq (talk) 04:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Sportech logo.svg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: keep. ✗plicit 02:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused logo not suitable for Commons. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I added the logo to the Sportech article. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:42, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Sharkadventures.jpg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama for 2D graphic works in the U.S. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ixfd64 can both de minimis of the shark image and threshold of originality apply here? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 22:41, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the shark can be considered de minimis as it is part of the logo. It's also above the ToO as it can't be described in terms of simple geometric shapes. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:00, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ixfd64 the TOO, I mean, for the text. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:10, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the text is fine. However, the image as a whole is likely out of scope as there doesn't seem to be an appropriate article that it could be added to. Ixfd64 (talk) 06:33, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unused and non-free. -- Whpq (talk) 04:37, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Silent siren band members.jpg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious claim of own work based on the description. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:48, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - claim of own work is is unlikely. -- Whpq (talk) 04:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:KimMcLeanSongwriter.jpg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious claim of own work based on the description. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:08, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - clearly not own work as the description pretty much admits it. -- Whpq (talk) 04:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Silly Plant Path.jpg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more files. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We need evidence that the sculpture is in public domain or located in a country that has freedom of panorama for 3D artworks. Copyright issues aside, this seems to be a personal photograph and therefore out of the project scope. Image is not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an unused personal image irrespective of any copyright issues. -- Whpq (talk) 04:40, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the file's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.