User talk:Billinghurst
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Maksim Gaspari v ateljeju 1910s.jpg: reply 2
← Older revision
Revision as of 22:28, 24 March 2013
Line 83:
Line 83:
:(ec) I closed the DR after further reviewing the Slovenian legislation and closely reviewing {{tl|PD-Slovenia}}, which was after asking those questions. My apologies for not making that clearer.
By Slovenian law the copyright of the photographer's work expired 1994, so the cited publication is just another out of copyright publication (re a generic copyright claim and old photos, ''NADA'' just laziness). Otherwise, you are talking about a posed photograph of the painter with his images are displayed as props about them. The ''de minimis'' argument would not be a strong argument where the permission of the artist would appear to have been given, and this is simply the reproduced photograph. The smaller images, in themselves, are not any detail where they could be reproduced, so the right of copy doesn't seem relevant. — [[user:billinghurst|billinghurst]] ''[[user talk:billinghurst|sDrewth]]'' 22:08, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
:(ec) I closed the DR after further reviewing the Slovenian legislation and closely reviewing {{tl|PD-Slovenia}}, which was after asking those questions. My apologies for not making that clearer.
By Slovenian law the copyright of the photographer's work expired 1994, so the cited publication is just another out of copyright publication (re a generic copyright claim and old photos, ''NADA'' just laziness). Otherwise, you are talking about a posed photograph of the painter with his images are displayed as props about them. The ''de minimis'' argument would not be a strong argument where the permission of the artist would appear to have been given, and this is simply the reproduced photograph. The smaller images, in themselves, are not any detail where they could be reproduced, so the right of copy doesn't seem relevant. — [[user:billinghurst|billinghurst]] ''[[user talk:billinghurst|sDrewth]]'' 22:08, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
+
::You conflate your argument, firstly you say that we need to respect the copyright of the publishing institute; then you argue that the artist's have their copyright and there is no publication allowed. I put it to you that the institute publishes the images as they are out of copyright, and that the images are primarily of people and that the images are not of suitable detail. If the images were of the works themselves, then your claim may be okay, but here they of insufficient detail in consideration of they are photographs of the artists. — [[user:billinghurst|billinghurst]] ''[[user talk:billinghurst|sDrewth]]'' 22:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Billinghurst&diff=93222596&oldid=93221840
/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)
