22 Mar

Commons:Village pump/Copyright

‎{{tl|PD-Italy}} vs it:Template:PD-Italia-film: WOOLLY
← Older revision
Revision as of 09:59, 22 March 2013
Line 349:
Line 349:

: Both tags refer to the same bit of the Italian law, yes. PD-Italy does mention film frames of film stock. The English translation of the law says "stills of cinematographic film". I've wondered about that (whether it's more like news footage, or do full-up artistic movie frames get the same treatment) but the English translation at least does seem to point to the shorter protection. [[User:Clindberg|Carl Lindberg]] ([[User talk:Clindberg|talk]]) 09:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

: Both tags refer to the same bit of the Italian law, yes. PD-Italy does mention film frames of film stock. The English translation of the law says "stills of cinematographic film". I've wondered about that (whether it's more like news footage, or do full-up artistic movie frames get the same treatment) but the English translation at least does seem to point to the shorter protection. [[User:Clindberg|Carl Lindberg]] ([[User talk:Clindberg|talk]]) 09:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

+

+
:: I read the relevant sections and it does seem like films are 70 pma in a normal sort of way, but an individual frame of film is not afforded the same protection. Article 87 doesn't actually specify any other kind of image than of ''"people or of aspects, elements and facts of natural or social life"'' - I suppose whatever images exist in opposition to this would get special protection as a work of art and the full 70 pma instead of 20 pr. Or perhaps the relevant criterion of artistic merit is defined elsewhere. It seems very woolly to me. --[[User:Moogsi|moogsi]] ([[User talk:Moogsi|blah]]) 09:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump/Copyright&diff=93077186&oldid=93075836