Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Flag of the Australian Aborigines.svg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion discussion 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.
- Fetch from speedy delete. Claimed to be copyrighted, but does copyright apply to such simple creations? / Fred Chess 08:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Keep utility articles without elements that, "physically or conceptually, can be identified as separable from the utilitarian aspects of that article." are exempt from copyright even if their appearance is "determined by aesthetic (as opposed to functional) considerations"[1] --Rtc 08:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)- The design of the flag is copyrighted in Australia according to the Australian court case described here: [2].--Nilfanion 16:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- They have UK derived copyright law, don't they? Then it's not really unexpected. Yet this flag is not copyrighted in most parts of the world. --Rtc 22:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- But since it was created in Australia, it should be under Australian law. Unless there is a special provision in the Aussie law that makes this PD, then we should move it back on English Wikipedia. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- No, the place where it was created is entirely irrelevant. According to the Berne Convention, works always enjoy the protection of the country in which they are actually used. For the purposes of commons, this place are the countries of those people requesting the files from the commons webserver. If you make a similar flag and it is not protected in your country, it will nevertheless be protected in Australia. Respecting "Sweat of the brow" countries such as the UK? Hardly possible in reality, if you ask me. --Rtc 23:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- "The countries of those people requesting the files from the commons webserver" will include Australia, what exactly can we license the image with? PD is inappropriate and "This image is free to use except in the following countries" seems daft to me.--Nilfanion 23:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- To be relatively clean, we'd have to make IP blocks for these pictures for the relevant countries (or block from display on commons and make only displayable through a set of specified wikipedias which by language are directed at a limited audience), which is not even technically implemented. Tagging perhaps by something like Template:PD-US (but merely tagging is futile, wikipedia users tend to simply ignore these warnings and use it anyway.) --Rtc 23:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- We can never be totally clean through that method (or any other) so I think delete. I did some hunting around and found further discussion on the en.wp fair use version of the image w:Image talk:Australian Aboriginal Flag.svg.--Nilfanion 00:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- To be relatively clean, we'd have to make IP blocks for these pictures for the relevant countries (or block from display on commons and make only displayable through a set of specified wikipedias which by language are directed at a limited audience), which is not even technically implemented. Tagging perhaps by something like Template:PD-US (but merely tagging is futile, wikipedia users tend to simply ignore these warnings and use it anyway.) --Rtc 23:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- "The countries of those people requesting the files from the commons webserver" will include Australia, what exactly can we license the image with? PD is inappropriate and "This image is free to use except in the following countries" seems daft to me.--Nilfanion 23:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- No, the place where it was created is entirely irrelevant. According to the Berne Convention, works always enjoy the protection of the country in which they are actually used. For the purposes of commons, this place are the countries of those people requesting the files from the commons webserver. If you make a similar flag and it is not protected in your country, it will nevertheless be protected in Australia. Respecting "Sweat of the brow" countries such as the UK? Hardly possible in reality, if you ask me. --Rtc 23:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- But since it was created in Australia, it should be under Australian law. Unless there is a special provision in the Aussie law that makes this PD, then we should move it back on English Wikipedia. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- They have UK derived copyright law, don't they? Then it's not really unexpected. Yet this flag is not copyrighted in most parts of the world. --Rtc 22:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Keep I saved a local copy on deWP. I don't think that's sense of commons. --Steschke 23:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Delete It is indisputably copyrighted (see Nilfanion's link) and was deleted from Commons before, when this was realised. Yes, it's a national flag. Our govt was a bit stupid and didn't check it was PD before making it a national flag, same with w:Torres Strait Islander Flag. Very straightforward delete case. pfctdayelise (translate?) 02:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Delete U.S. law (following the Berne convention) upholds the copyright of the country of origin. The wikimedia servers are in Florida and so images hosted here are subject to U.S. law. —JeremyA 01:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
- No, it gives the work the protection it would be granted in the country of use (Schutzlandprinzip), there is no country of origin concept in Berne convention. --Rtc 01:18, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete --Dodo 22:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Keep The Australian Aboriginal flag is not copyright even if is on a server of Florida, because is not an american flag but an Aboriginal Flag, and is under the Australian Law that not provide the copyright--Zmlsf2b 07:15, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- Keep as trivial. Contains no original authorship. -- Denelson83 23:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyrighted, as evident by [3]. / Fred Chess 12:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
