File talk:Friedwardt Winterberg.jpg
 | This file was nominated for deletion on 27 January 2023 but was kept. If you are thinking about re-nominating it for deletion, please read that discussion first. |
copied from commons:Deletion requests.:
This proposed deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Image:Winterberg.jpg[edit]
Uploaded by a user who labeled it as CC-SA. Upon further contact with user to confirm that the copyright holder had licensed it as CC-SA, uploader explained that he had simply asked the professor for a photo, but had not confirmed anything about its licensing requirements or whether it can be put on Commons. Uploader has instructed others to e-mail the professor himself to get such information; I think we and the professor have better things to do than follow up on his lack of incentive. User has been informed that failure to confirm the licensing situation will result in deletion. See w:User_talk:Licorne#Image:Winterberg.jpg for the exchange. --Fastfission 00:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Onus is on uploader to show the image is freely licensed - not us or anyone else.
Delete pfctdayelise (translate?) 02:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC) 
Keep for now. Winterberg has contacted me on some other issue, and I asked him about the image. He asserted that he owns the rights and seems to be willing to license it appropriately. I'll ask him for a formal declaration. --Stephan Schulz 13:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Sorry, but we have to be correct here. If Mr. Winterberg hasn't taken the picture himself, he doesn't own the rights and therefore cannot license it. You have to ask the photographer and no one else. --Fb78 10:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- If he asserts he owns the rights there's no reason to suspect otherwise. There are all sorts of arrangements that result in the subject and not the photographer owning the copyright (work for hire, informal or formal). --Fastfission 16:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC) --Fastfission 16:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Winterberg claims (translated from German): "Concerning the picture, I can assure you that it is my property, because it was taken with my camera in front of my office at the University of Nevada", i.e. it was a situation where he passed the camera to someone else, who took a snap. I find it very hard to belive that in such a setting the person who actually presses the button owns the copyright. Otherwise, a lot of holiday pictures will be online illegally... --Stephan Schulz 10:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Whether you believe it or not: If someone else takes a snapshot with your camera, you don't own the copyright to this picture. Same for recording equipment etc. I doubt that Mr. Winterberg is an expert in copyright law.
- You could argue, of course, that by handing the camera to a stranger to make a snapshot of you, you created an unspoken contract that gives you the exclusive rights to the picture. But that is mere speculation. I'm not a lawyer, and only a lawyer could answer this. In this case, however, I think copyright laws are pretty clear about who is the creator and who is not. --Fb78 15:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Disagree.
- The person who decides what to photo, and where, "creates" the photo. The person who holds the camera is just pressing a button, mechanically. Fred Chess 15:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- you don't really think that that person that actually pressed the button to take the picture for him, comes and claimes the copyright? This deletion request is quite absurd. Anyways if you ask someone to take a picture for you he does exactly that, he "takes a picture for you" and thus releases his rights. -- Gorgo 21:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Winterberg claims (translated from German): "Concerning the picture, I can assure you that it is my property, because it was taken with my camera in front of my office at the University of Nevada", i.e. it was a situation where he passed the camera to someone else, who took a snap. I find it very hard to belive that in such a setting the person who actually presses the button owns the copyright. Otherwise, a lot of holiday pictures will be online illegally... --Stephan Schulz 10:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- If he asserts he owns the rights there's no reason to suspect otherwise. There are all sorts of arrangements that result in the subject and not the photographer owning the copyright (work for hire, informal or formal). --Fastfission 16:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC) --Fastfission 16:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Keep - We should let the Kirche im Dorf. How can the person who presses the button make a proof that it is the copyright owner? --Historiograf 16:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Kept - majority thinks it's ok, and no proof of the opposite. / Fred Chess 14:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
