Commons:Deletion requests/File:Xi Jinping Banner in Mong Kok 20141026.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion debate 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:Xi Jinping Banner in Mong Kok 20141026.jpg[edit]
Derivative work of a derivative work, cannot ascertain copyright of the creator of the poster nor the image used as a basis for its creation. KTo288 (talk) 20:21, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
- Speedy delete - Very obvious double copyright violations. STSC (talk) 20:59, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep STSC actually objects to the image purely on the supposed grounds that it is "mocking the leader of a country"(!) The copyright of the image used for the creation of the poster in the photograph? That's not even remotely a matter for anyone here to concern themselves about. Signedzzz (talk) 00:09, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- @User:Signedzzz copyright is exactly what we concern ourselves with here, please read. Commons:Derivative works.--KTo288 (talk) 00:42, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- No, any publication in the world could use this photo without any copyright issues. Are you seriously suggesting the image of the poster in the middle would need to be "pixellated"? The photo is of people in a public street gathered round the poster. What if it was a film poster, or a shop front with a display, for example - would you object then? Or a banner stuck to a wall - do we need to find who made it and get written permission if it happens to appear in a photo? What if the banner contained another banner? This objection is patent nonsense. Signedzzz (talk) 13:17, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- See Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Posters, since the poster is the focus of the file Commons:De minimis cannot be argued.--KTo288 (talk) 22:41, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- No, any publication in the world could use this photo without any copyright issues. Are you seriously suggesting the image of the poster in the middle would need to be "pixellated"? The photo is of people in a public street gathered round the poster. What if it was a film poster, or a shop front with a display, for example - would you object then? Or a banner stuck to a wall - do we need to find who made it and get written permission if it happens to appear in a photo? What if the banner contained another banner? This objection is patent nonsense. Signedzzz (talk) 13:17, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- Dear Signedzzz, my objection expressed on Wikipedia still stands, actually. STSC (talk) 19:11, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- @User:Signedzzz copyright is exactly what we concern ourselves with here, please read. Commons:Derivative works.--KTo288 (talk) 00:42, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep There is no copyright violation, as reasonable use in parodies is a fair-dealing exception under Hong Kong legislation passed this year: Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014, and the image is otherwise reasonably covered by freedom of panorama in HK. --Ohconfucius (talk) 02:55, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Hong_Kong reads, "OK for 3D works, not always for 2D...Therefore freedom given in Sect 71 does not apply to posters or maps in public places." and that , "object is permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public". This work is 2d and cannot be said to be permanent. As far as I can see from the link you've given, the amendment to the law now allows for fair use of copyrighted material to satirise and comment, that's fine for what it is but re Commons:Fair use, "Fair use" not allowed on Commons".--KTo288 (talk) 07:36, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete At best, this is a fair use photographic reproduction of a photoshopped image based on a copyrighted photo of Xi Jinping holding an umbrella [1]. Since Commons does not and cannot host fair use images, there isn't much to discuss. Underbar dk (talk) 21:05, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep if Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Hong_Kong say not always for 2D, therefore all these photos in this category should be delete [2] It will make more users criticized. In Umbrella Revoution, artwork is one of the major contribution inside this movement, we should not want to censor the issue and ignore it. If this picture "Fair use" in Wikipedia, there are some administrator will also use different reasons to ask for DR as soon as possible and suggest this picture move to commons upload again. I want to say that there only few people participate in Wikipedia now, esp in Hong Kong, it is because some people follow these non-sense rules in Commons/Wikipedia, but without any consider the situation in nowadays. So Wikipedia become less useful and attractive and get more criticized from users.--Wing1990hk (talk) 01:51, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep this photo. We will be criticised as "self-censoring" if this photo is deleted. We cannot allow acts of "self-censorship", otherwise the reputation of Wikimedia Foundation will be destroyed. So far, the photos of different banners are distributed on the Internet, without being warned about copyright issues. If the act of uploading the photos of banners violated the copyright, whoever uploaded the photos would have been warned a few weeks ago. Furthermore, this photo is taken by the one who uploads this photo.--Tony YKS (talk), 9:30PM, 8/11/2014 (HKT)
- Keep this photo. All the non-sense rules in Commons/Wikipedia, like saying "fair-use is not allowed in Commons/Wikipedia" without any consider the situation in nowadays, are just self-censoring in fact. Commons is part of wikipedia -- those who wanna delete it will deny it, but it is the truth in the opinion of normal editors. --Tvb10data (talk) 08:33, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - Obscure rules about the copyright of this poster are going to remove a picture of it from the Commons? Absurd. Work for the good of the world, not for petty laws. RGloucester (talk) 15:03, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom and arguments of KTo288. INeverCry 03:07, 13 November 2014 (UTC)