Commons:Deletion requests/File:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.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.
To be kept on Commons, works must be PD in the USA and in "own country". I see no evidence that this painting is PD in Russia. Teofilo (talk) 15:54, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
- Wouldn't Template:PD-RusEmpire apply? --GRuban (talk) 16:13, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
I have no objection, if someone thinks Template:PD-RusEmpire is OK then it is OK. Teofilo (talk) 16:39, 14 December 2011 (UTC)- Template:PD-RusEmpire seems to merely say this work is not protected by copyright internationally. It sounds like that the work could not be protected in the USA by a US court. But that template leaves open the question whether the work is protected by copyright by the national copyright law of Russia and by Russian courts. At the bottom of Template:PD-RusEmpire there is a recommendation to use Template:PD-Russia-2008 instead. I think that at this point we have no evidence that any of the criteria of Template:PD-Russia-2008 apply. Teofilo (talk) 13:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Things can get messy with changing borders. At the time, the Russian Empire contained a number of other modern states. If published in the Empire, would it be considered "simultaneously published" in all those other countries today, since it was presumably published in those areas at the time? If so, then by the Berne Convention, the country among those with the shortest term would be the "country of origin", not necessarily modern-day Russia. Belarus, with its 50pma term, would probably be the one with the shortest term. Kind of a tough question. But if PD-RusEmpire is a valid template, it may apply. It was created in the wake of Russia's 2008 law by some folks who I think were pretty familiar with the legal situation there, so if it is a valid tag, not sure why it wouldn't apply. If you think it's not a valid tag at all, that is a separate DR. Unfortunately the two reference URLs explaining the legal situation no longer work. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- I have updated the URLs to archived version. There were also relevant discussions in Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2010/08#Verifying_the_application_of_PD-RusEmpire and w:ru:Обсуждение шаблона:PD-RusEmpire (in Russian). The basic idea is that the modern Russian Federation is not the legal successor of the Russian Empire and does not recognize the rights which Russian Empire provided, including copyrights and physical property rights (the latter is important because there were many claims on property and none was ever upheld in Russian courts). --M5 (talk) 07:12, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- The people born in St Petersburg before 1917 are considered as being Russian citizens, I guess. When Rodchenko died in Moscow 1956, he was a soviet citizen living in en:Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic. If we consider the French point of view, "droit d'auteur" is a right attached to the person of the creator, not to the physical ownership of the work. But let's have a look at the Russian civil code. Article 1256 of Russian civil code says "The exclusive right in works of science, literature, and art shall extend: (...) 2) to works made public outside the territory of the Russian Federation or not made public but existing in some objective form outside the territory of the Russian Federation and shall be recognized for authors who are citizens of the Russian Federation (or their legal successors); My understanding is that if an American artist published his work in Moscow in 1915, he can't receive protection for his work. But if the author is a Russian, it is OK. Teofilo (talk) 10:06, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- Hm interesting. It does sound like the author would receive protection in Russia today (though it probably was in the PD at least for a couple years I think, and maybe a lot longer due to old USSR copyright rules). The main question though is what is the Berne country of origin, by its definition. In which modern-day Berne countries would it be considered published in 1915? It does get weird. None of the countries involved were Berne members at the time... though all are now. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:05, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- I could not find any detailed legal analyses of the issue but there is an evidence that in Russia pre-1917 works are treated in practice as public domain: there are publishers which reprint pre-1917 books claiming they are "unencumbered by copyright" ("не обремененные авторским правом"): [1] [2]. Moreover, w:Russian State Library provides "copies of non-copyrighted printed works" ("копии произведений печати, не являющихся объектами авторского права") which it defines as "official and regulatory documents, and documents published before 1917" ("официальные и нормативные документы и документы, изданные до 1917 года"), see [3]. --M5 (talk) 07:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
- Hm interesting. It does sound like the author would receive protection in Russia today (though it probably was in the PD at least for a couple years I think, and maybe a lot longer due to old USSR copyright rules). The main question though is what is the Berne country of origin, by its definition. In which modern-day Berne countries would it be considered published in 1915? It does get weird. None of the countries involved were Berne members at the time... though all are now. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:05, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- The people born in St Petersburg before 1917 are considered as being Russian citizens, I guess. When Rodchenko died in Moscow 1956, he was a soviet citizen living in en:Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic. If we consider the French point of view, "droit d'auteur" is a right attached to the person of the creator, not to the physical ownership of the work. But let's have a look at the Russian civil code. Article 1256 of Russian civil code says "The exclusive right in works of science, literature, and art shall extend: (...) 2) to works made public outside the territory of the Russian Federation or not made public but existing in some objective form outside the territory of the Russian Federation and shall be recognized for authors who are citizens of the Russian Federation (or their legal successors); My understanding is that if an American artist published his work in Moscow in 1915, he can't receive protection for his work. But if the author is a Russian, it is OK. Teofilo (talk) 10:06, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- I have updated the URLs to archived version. There were also relevant discussions in Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2010/08#Verifying_the_application_of_PD-RusEmpire and w:ru:Обсуждение шаблона:PD-RusEmpire (in Russian). The basic idea is that the modern Russian Federation is not the legal successor of the Russian Empire and does not recognize the rights which Russian Empire provided, including copyrights and physical property rights (the latter is important because there were many claims on property and none was ever upheld in Russian courts). --M5 (talk) 07:12, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- Things can get messy with changing borders. At the time, the Russian Empire contained a number of other modern states. If published in the Empire, would it be considered "simultaneously published" in all those other countries today, since it was presumably published in those areas at the time? If so, then by the Berne Convention, the country among those with the shortest term would be the "country of origin", not necessarily modern-day Russia. Belarus, with its 50pma term, would probably be the one with the shortest term. Kind of a tough question. But if PD-RusEmpire is a valid template, it may apply. It was created in the wake of Russia's 2008 law by some folks who I think were pretty familiar with the legal situation there, so if it is a valid tag, not sure why it wouldn't apply. If you think it's not a valid tag at all, that is a separate DR. Unfortunately the two reference URLs explaining the legal situation no longer work. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Keep, then. If they were public domain once, they should be public domain now, at least as far as we're concerned. I'm pretty sure, we, as a project, don't accept the idea that freely licensed status can be "taken away" - if it can be, then every single one of our images is at risk, and even the concept of "freely licensed" means nothing. --GRuban (talk) 04:22, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- comment to closing admin: Should it end the way it goes now, please provide some guidance on deletion of other files tagged with PD-RusEmpire (a) when author is known and not dead enough yet (b) when the author is not known - like the sea of the old postcards. NVO (talk) 18:43, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Keep agree with GRuban Werieth (talk) 13:25, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Kept, Thuresson (talk) 18:50, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
