Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Hitler portrait MH 4919.jpg
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.
No proof that a formal portrait of Adolf Hitler was created by the United Kingdom Government. Most likely taken by his personal photographer en:Heinrich Hoffmann. -- Kam Solusar 03:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- If it wasn't then what is it doing in the IWM collection. The page on the IWM site says that access is unrestricted [1] G-Man 20:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- I am not particularly familiar with it, but note that the website claims "Crown copyright" over its collection. The terms of use are here and we may want to note whether or not the museum's requirements for commercial use would restrict it from use with the Wikimedia Foundation; or if we should revise the license template. As a separate note: per this flowchart it appears that the restrictions have expired. Granted, that is if the Crown can indeed claim copyright over it. As to the declaration that access is "unrestricted", I cannot say. The terms of use notes, in the General Statement, that it cannot guarantee its accuracy... so can we trust its declaration as "unrestricted"? And one last thought: if it was taken by Hitler's personal photographer, but as Hitler was in uniform & acting as an agent of the German government, could it be argued that the photo is subject to German licensing laws? --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 21:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- If the author is unknown the picture can go under this licence, disregarding the IWM: {{Anonymous-EU}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by A1B2C3D4 (talk • contribs) Kam Solusar (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC) (UTC)
- I am not particularly familiar with it, but note that the website claims "Crown copyright" over its collection. The terms of use are here and we may want to note whether or not the museum's requirements for commercial use would restrict it from use with the Wikimedia Foundation; or if we should revise the license template. As a separate note: per this flowchart it appears that the restrictions have expired. Granted, that is if the Crown can indeed claim copyright over it. As to the declaration that access is "unrestricted", I cannot say. The terms of use notes, in the General Statement, that it cannot guarantee its accuracy... so can we trust its declaration as "unrestricted"? And one last thought: if it was taken by Hitler's personal photographer, but as Hitler was in uniform & acting as an agent of the German government, could it be argued that the photo is subject to German licensing laws? --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 21:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, but "we don't know the author" doesn't mean he was anonymous. --Kam Solusar (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- The IWM states the author of many pictures on their page, so I think that the IWM and its statemets can be consedered a reliable source.--A1B2C3D4 (talk) 14:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
- Not necessarily. See this deletion request, where another Hitler image from the IWM turned out to be a copyrighted Hoffmann photo. --Kam Solusar (talk) 22:33, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
deleted, per request. IWM collection turned out to keep „unrestricted“ photos in the past which are still copyrighted in the country of creation for decades. The author „British Government“ is obviously wrong, so a proper source is missing. --Polarlys (talk) 15:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
