Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Steve Stanton - City of Largo.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.

Image:Steve Stanton - City of Largo.jpg

[edit]

Images from the City of Largo are not automatically PD, they're copyrighted to the State of Florida. Ms. Graves does not release them by this email, nor has the authority to do so. This picture is not PD. It's replaceable fairuse. --NYC JD 19:33, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw nom per PD-FLGov, which I was not aware of. NYC JD 18:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep. I don't see how this argument works. The photo is by the City of Largo, which is a separate legal entity from the State of Florida. The State would not own photographs that are commissioned and paid for by the city. I have asked the original uploader to forward the email to OTRS, however in the meantime, I believe that Heather Graves, as the Communications and Marketing Manager for the City of Largo, would certainly know the copyright status of the photographs she handles. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? — coelacan — 05:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Whoever owns the copyright, she is not releasing them by the terms of her email. She is merely stating that they are PD. I am completely prepared to believe that she doesn't know a lick of copyright law. NYC JD 11:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm prepared to believe that too, but one doesn't need to know copyright law to simply know the status of an image as public domain or not. The City of Largo may indeed make its official portraits public domain. We don't know. I'm prepared to believe that she does have that information on file. — coelacan — 18:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I believe that this mail is sufficient. Yann 15:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep. I agree, the email is sufficient. The fact that the City of Largo is located in Florida does not mean the State of Florida owns copyright to the City's photos, anymore than the State of Alaska owns copyright to my photos because I live in Alaska. --Yksin 01:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a work of the State of Florida, this image appears to be in the public domain per the explanation given at {{PD-FLGov}} ˉanetode╦╩ 22:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shouldnt this photo be taken down (not because it is an infringing work) because the gender marker has been changed to Susan? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.21.118.150 (talk • contribs) at 22:06, May 18, 2007 (UTC)
  •  Delete - if the copyright holder doesn't know a lick about copyright, which I think is the case and apparently others do to, then we can't assume they know a lick about the public domain. Saying, "This photograph was taken for the City of Largo and, as such, is in the public domain", is wrong, unless a citation of municipal law is provided to back that up. It is not a work of the State of Florida, it is a work of the City of Largo; they are different jurisdictions. This image should be deleted unless further correspondence (1) indicates that it is in fact in the public domain (2) uses the Commons:Email templates and (3) is more than the false assertion that, because the photograph is a work of the City of Largo, it is in the public domain. --Iamunknown 02:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Somehow I think that the Communications and Marketing Manager of the City of Largo just might know what she is talking about. Just maybe, you know, since it is her job and all. Note that the nomination itself states that City of Largo images are copyrighted by the State of Florida. So there are two possibilities: all rights were released by Ms. Graves acting in official capacity, or the image falls into the public domain per {{PD-FLGov}}. ˉanetode╦╩ 15:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't think the first possibility is very likely, as Communications and Marketing Manager is not automatically equivalent to someone in the capacity to license (or release all rights to) copyrighted material; the second might be, but I would like clarification. --Iamunknown 16:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Fair enough. I'll ask en:user:y for verification of the assertion made in his nomination. ˉanetode╦╩ 17:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • He thinks that "towns like Largo are creatures of state law and, unless we know otherwise, do not reserve copyrights in a manner different from that of the state," perhaps referring to the city as a en:creature of statute. I tend to agree that this supports Graves' assertion, even if she is not the license holder. The question here is whether any governmental body of the city of Largo even has the right to assert copyright. As I see it, the only way to get the end-all-be-all verification that you are looking for would be to contact Graves at 727-587-6740 ext.2104. ˉanetode╦╩ 18:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. As noted by 76.21.118.150, the information as provided in the template {{PD-FLGov}}, which is applied to this image, makes it pretty clear that this image is in the public domain by Florida statute and Florida case law. Is an admin planning on closing this debate anytime soon? It's not been in progress for over three months. --yksin 21:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator and hence kept per {{PD-FLGov}} -- Cat chi? 22:30, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:Steve_Stanton_-_City_of_Largo.jpg&oldid=17810058"