Commons:Village pump/Copyright
Israeli Air Force logos: tfc to me cmt
← Older revision
Revision as of 08:59, 22 March 2013
Line 341:
Line 341:
:::::::With respect I think I made far more than a "reasonable case that one of the logos ''may'' have been created after 1962" but in fact a very ''positive'' case that the affirmative evidence proves that it was not -- and ''could'' not -- have been produced ''before'' 1978. The more important point, however, is that an essential prerequisite for applying [[:Template:PD-IsraelGov|"PD-IsraelGov"]] in this case, or ''any'' PD licensing template in any other situation, to a file is that whoever does so is obliged to be able to provide ''affirmative proof'' that the file is in fact PD based on the expiration of its copyright term or for whatever other reason as opposed to just ''speculating'' that such is the case. In other words the ''burden of proof'' is on the editor who ''makes'' the claim that a file is PD, not on the rest of the community to prove that the file is ''not'' copyright protected. Following that simple policy should eliminate 99% of the copyright disputes on WP.
:::::::With respect I think I made far more than a "reasonable case that one of the logos ''may'' have been created after 1962" but in fact a very ''positive'' case that the affirmative evidence proves that it was not -- and ''could'' not -- have been produced ''before'' 1978. The more important point, however, is that an essential prerequisite for applying [[:Template:PD-IsraelGov|"PD-IsraelGov"]] in this case, or ''any'' PD licensing template in any other situation, to a file is that whoever does so is obliged to be able to provide ''affirmative proof'' that the file is in fact PD based on the expiration of its copyright term or for whatever other reason as opposed to just ''speculating'' that such is the case. In other words the ''burden of proof'' is on the editor who ''makes'' the claim that a file is PD, not on the rest of the community to prove that the file is ''not'' copyright protected. Following that simple policy should eliminate 99% of the copyright disputes on WP.
−
:::::::Now as for your contention that your personal interpretation of copyright law "trumps" a published user agreement or copyright notice I believe that WP's policy and guidelines require the following. Whenever such a copyright notice is found, it is then incumbent upon any WP contributor who wants to claim that a covered file is actually PD under applicable copyright law to: A) present an absolutely "airtight" case with no holes whatsoever that they are correct, and; B) is then further obligated lay out that case to the community for comment and consensus ''before'' using the file in any WP article. This is especially true when the copyright claim is made by a government as it was in this case as this should be given extra weight and credence. Upon my investigation in this case I was able to prove that the Government of Israel was correct about the copyright status of this image as not yet being free under §42 of the Israeli Copyright Act of 2007 as was not only ''not'' produced before 1962, it could not have been produced any earlier than 1978, and that your "speculation" that it was free because it ''was'' produced before 1962 proved to be just that: false speculation. Such a blatant "cart before the horse" approach is just not good enough to meet the policies and guidelines of WP for the use of copyrighted material. So again let me point out that the "burden of proof" is ''always'' on the contributor or proponent to be able to show that an image file is actually PD if that is what he or she claims, and not on the community to be able to prove the opposite. [[User:Centpacrr|Centpacrr]] ([[User talk:Centpacrr|talk]]) 03:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
+
:::::::Now as for your contention that your personal interpretation of copyright law "trumps" a published user agreement or copyright notice I believe that WP's policy and guidelines require the following. Whenever such a copyright notice is found, it is then incumbent upon any WP contributor who wants to claim that a covered file is actually PD under applicable copyright law to: A) present an absolutely "airtight" case with no holes whatsoever that they are correct, and; B) is then further obligated lay out that case to the community for comment and consensus ''before'' using the file in any WP article. This is especially true when the copyright claim is made by a government as it was in this case as this should be given extra weight and credence. Upon my investigation in this case I was able to find compelling evidence that the Government of Israel was correct about the copyright status of this image as not yet being free under §42 of the Israeli Copyright Act of 2007 as it was not only ''not'' produced before 1962, it could not have been produced any earlier than 1978. Thus your "speculation" that it was [[:Template:PD-IsraelGov|"PD-IsraelGov"]] because you surmised that it had been produced before 1962 proved to be just false speculation. Such a blatant "cart before the horse" approach is just not good enough to meet the policies and guidelines of WP for the use of copyrighted material. So again let me point out that the "burden of proof" is ''always'' on the contributor or proponent to be able to show that an image file is actually PD if that is what he or she claims, and not on the community to be able to prove the opposite. [[User:Centpacrr|Centpacrr]] ([[User talk:Centpacrr|talk]]) 03:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
== {{tl|PD-Italy}} vs [[:it:Template:PD-Italia-film]] ==
== {{tl|PD-Italy}} vs [[:it:Template:PD-Italia-film]] ==
/image%2F0119748%2F20140527%2Fob_5bc3f3_alfred-molet-timbre-postal-01.JPG)
/https%3A%2F%2Fassets.over-blog.com%2Ft%2Fcedistic%2Fcamera.png)
/image%2F0119748%2F20140527%2Fob_49a920_alfred-molet-timbre-postal-01.JPG)
/image%2F0119748%2F20140511%2Fob_63b87d_carte-02.jpg)
