Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Lazar Kaganovich

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.

Files in Category:Lazar Kaganovich[edit]

no indication of early enough PUBLICATION to be PD (mostly 2000's books or modern websites, no way early enough). Or, published early enough, but with an attribution that renders the item still copyrighted.

PlanespotterA320 (talk) 15:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]



In regards to File:Joseph Stalin Lazar Kaganovich 1933.jpg, we do not know if the (A Oshurkov) died defore the cut-off date (1 January 1946), and we do not know if the photos by Troshkin and Langman were published early enough - the links are to modern websites, and they can't be used if that website indicated was the earliest publication, regardless of when the author died. They all have to have been published early enough to be PD, and right now there is no reason to think so for those two.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 00:41, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"No reason to think" that the "1938 album" was published in 1938? Do you mean that the provided source is not reliable enough for that claim, or what? --INS Pirat (talk) 10:40, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@INS Pirat: That one must have slipped my watch, removing it from the list. As for the photos by Troshkin - remember that copyright countdown begins on publication date, not death date of photographer, if a photo is published posthumously. AND Troshkin was a participant in the GPW, so unless we have evidence the Troshkin photos were published early enough sans attribution, they can't be here. The "no reason to think" comment was a reference to the books published after the fall of the USSR cited as sole sources.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:14, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In regards to the Troshkin photos - let's remember the annotation from the licence. "If the work was first published posthumously, the copyright term is counted from the date of that first publication, unless the author was later rehabilitated, in which case it runs again from that later rehabilitation date." As far as I know, the photos from RIA novosti by Torshkin were first published in the 2000's as indicated in the url's from the source section, NOT in enough time for their copyright to have expired within a 74 year countdown. Right now, no works by Troshkin published after 1945 can be PD in Russia because of the Great Patriotic War clause and the rules about posthumous publication.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 21:08, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, thx, it's discussing in Russian Wikipedia: [3]. See p. 3 in art. 1281 of GK RF. Lesless (talk) 05:11, 10 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, 2018 is after 2015, so it does not fall under p.3 of article 1281, and it will be free too.--Anatoliy (talk) 21:05, 17 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@George Shuklin: No, they are considered to be copyrighted unless early enough publication is found. We cannot assume those photos from the museum had been published by the 1940's, we need to know what publication from early enough (if such publication existed) they were in. Just because the museum did not label the authors of the photos doesn't mean they are public domain - again, this all goes back to when they were first published. Right now, the earliest know publication date for them when they were shown at a museum in the 21st century - NOT long enough for anything to fall into the public domain, author known or not. However - if the museum is the copyright holder of the photos, AND they are willing of officially release them under a license permitted by Wikimedia (such as CC-BY-SA 4.0), then the photos could stay. Consider writing the museum a letter asking for them to send an OTRS permission letter to Wikimedia.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 21:36, 10 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @PlanespotterA320: I think, you should not simply revert sysop actions. Please begin new requests instead of revert actions.--Anatoliy (talk) 21:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Ahonc: Just bc they's a sysop or whatever doesn't mean they know anything about copyright. Nobody has yet to provide an indication of early enough publication for those photos, and because Russia has the posthumous publication clause, the nomination will stand. Considering the only publication information given is that they were uploaded by RIA Novosti in the 2010's, we have absolutely no reason to think they are PD right now, regardless of when the author died. Being by Troshkin is not an excuse for not being published in time.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 21:19, 17 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Well, it is your opinion. But your opinion is not only right opinion. If you think that photos are not free, it is not mean that they are not free. I am near-native speaker of Russian language, so it is more easy to understand Russian law for me, than for you. And also, I read discussion on WP in ruwiki. If images of Troshkin are first published after 2015-01-01 thay are free. There is no evedence now that images are published earlier, and that's why these images consider as free.--Anatoliy (talk) 21:31, 17 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • We can't be certain that the RIAN website was the first publication. (For example, if they were published in the 1960's, we would have to wait many years, and Wikipedia would be in trouble for uploading copyrighted photos from RIAN) We don't know when the first publication was for sure, but we do know that we don't have proof they were published in the 1940's to be PD by virtue of publication time lapsing either. Discussions on ruwiki are merely other people stating what they think, anyone can write anything. Let's stick to pure fact. It is an objective FACT that the Russian Civil code has a posthumous publication clause. The requirements for something to be public domain, clearly outlined in Template:PD-Russia (including in the footnotes), are not met by most of the photos in the Troshkin category. Read the copyright law and the PD-Russia template, or don't participate in these discussions. Being a Russian should not give you more leverage on the topic - considering that a vast majority of Russians are completely naive about their country's copyright law. You don't need to be a Russian to read various unofficial, quality translations of Russian copyright law.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 22:10, 17 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • Why did you make such conclusion? Copyright law says: Исключительное право на произведение, обнародованное после смерти автора, действует в течение семидесяти лет после обнародования произведения, считая с 1 января года, следующего за годом его обнародования, при условии, что произведение было обнародовано в течение семидесяти лет после смерти автора. Copyright term is 70 years if work was published during 70 years after author's death. 1944+70+1=2015, so Troshkin's works, first published after 2015-01-01 are certainly free.--Anatoliy (talk) 22:29, 17 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • But how do we know that the files from 2018 from RIA Novosti were the FIRST publication? They easily could be re-publications of stuff published in print from the 20th century, albeit after the cutoff date - like hundreds of other photos from RIA Novosti.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 23:48, 17 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
            • Your question "how do we know" that the 2018 publication of a photo was the first publication is the same as asking for proof that the photo was NOT published before 2018. But this is impossible. You cannot prove what is not but only what is. If you want to rule out use of a photo because you think it was published before 2018, then it is your responsibility to prove that is the case. In the absence of such proof, it is reasonable to accept the 2018 publication as earliest. Dayirmiter (talk) 09:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kept: they looking OK to me. --JuTa 05:29, 3 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Lazar_Kaganovich&oldid=478991519"