Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:1930s Photographs, Allentown, Pennsylvania

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
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.

Files in Category:1930s Photographs, Allentown, Pennsylvania

[edit]

All of these images seem to be from unknown photographers and are licensed as PD-US-pre1978, which requires the work be "published" in the United States between 1928 and 1977. There's zero evidence any of these photographs were "published" prior to being uploaded to Commons though. Probably they weren't. As they look to be taken by amateurs and lack sources. So these images should be deleted as COPYVIO unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary.

Adamant1 (talk) 00:42, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They appear to have been scanned from a book, so they apparently were published, but we would need to know when. If only the uploader had given a reference to the source of the scans. PaterMcFly (talk) 09:00, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which files say they are scanned from a book? From what I remember looking through them, most or all of the files say they were "Self Scanned" but that could mean anything. I don't remember any of them saying their were scanned from a book. Not to say it isn't possible I accidently included a few that are. They can just be removed the DR if that's the case though. So can you link to the ones that come from books? --Adamant1 (talk) 09:21, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for being unclear. I interpreted "self scanned" as "scanned from a book", because these images are very likely much older than the uploader is. Of course, it's also possible that they where scanned from a family archive. PaterMcFly (talk) 15:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK. That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying what you meant. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:04, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination & discussion; not enough information to establish copyright status. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 23:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:1930s Photographs, Allentown, Pennsylvania

[edit]

All of these images seem to be from unknown photographers and are licensed as PD-US-pre1978, which requires the work be "published" in the United States between 1928 and 1977. There's zero evidence any of these photographs were "published" prior to being uploaded to Commons though. Probably they weren't. As they look to be taken by amateurs and lack sources. So these images should be deleted as COPYVIO unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary.

Adamant1 (talk) 01:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep The images only have to be "made public" not appear in a newspaper or magazine. United States copyright case law has sided with, when an image leaves the custody of a photographer, it has been made available to the public. Searches with Tineye and Google Image Search has not found a named photographer, nor has it found anyone making an active copyright claim. And as the license states to be eligible for a copyright up to 1964 you had to have the year and copyright symbol on the image, and then renew the copyright. I can not find any registrations or renewals for any images marked "Allentown" or "Allentown, Pennsylvania" or "Allentown, PA". Up until 1989, you had 5 years to register for a copyright, and again no registrations for "Allentown". I cannot find any known copyright registrations or known copyright restrictions. Even The Morning Call (Q3910677), the Allentown newspaper never filed for copyrights or renewals. And as with the previous set of deletions, the newspaper didn't even have a copyright notice on the masthead until the 1980s. --RAN (talk) 13:50, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No offense, but I'm not sure how your whole thing about copyright would be relevant since like I said, the images probably weren't published prior to being uploaded to Commons. So there wouldn't be a copyright too register or renew in the first place. That doesn't mean the images are PD though. Regardless, publication doesn't relate to "when an image leaves the custody of a photographer." It has to do with wider distribution to the public. Although even if it did, we don't know exactly when these photographs left the custody of the photographer to begin with. For all we know they were donated to the project right before being uploaded. If that's the case then they would still be copyrighted and regardless of there being a copyright symbol on the image or not. Since it doesn't matter at this point. What does Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States say "Published from March 2, 1989 to 2002: pre-1978 creation. If author is unknown or corporate authorship, the earlier of 95 years after first publication or 120 years after creation." How do you know these images weren't published (by your standards) between 1989 to 2002? Really, we know absolutely nothing about the photographs except that Atwngirl uploaded them in 2018. That's literally it though and in no way is that enough to say they aren't copyrighted. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are narrowly defining publication as appearing in a newspaper or a magazine. "Made public" is when an image leaves the custody of the creator. If the creator had an intent to copyright, they were required to include the copyright symbol on all "perceptible copies", and if created prior to 1989, register with the copyright office. You could also mail a copy to the copyright office and they would register the image with the name of the creator and a short description of the image. All those requirements were dropped after 1989. Your argument was also rejected at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Newspaper advertising in Allentown, Pennsylvania. --RAN (talk) 17:50, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. I never said publication can only be in a newspaper or magazine. I can't find it right now, but there was a DR recently having to do with so called "found photographs" and at least from that it sounded like publication had to involve distributing multiple copies beyond the persons imediate family. For instance if a photographer simply gets their image developed at a local pharmacy that's not "publication" even though the photograph left the photographers custody. Per the definition by the United States Copyright Office "Publication is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending." So does that have to be a newspaper or a magazine? No, but you still need evidence that copies of the photograph were sold, transferred, or otherwise distributed to the public before Atwngirl uploaded them to internet. Or are you going to tell me the United States Copyright Office and people in the previous DR don't know what they are talking about? I'm not really sure why you'd bring up the DR about newspaper clipping like that's an argument when these are photographs either. Newspapers are published, obviously, but that has nothing to do with this deletion request. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:46, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The original creative work is the photographic negative in these cases, unless using an instant/digital camera that does not create a negative. When the photographer makes a print/proof sheet from that negative they have made a "perceivable copy" and that copy must contain a copyright symbol and the name of the copyright holder, and then the image must be registered and then have that registration renewed prior to 1964 to be eligible for a United States copyright. See for instance Category:Bain copyright notice where the copyright notice is right on the glass negative, and appears on every perceivable copy/print. In the past we have declared images unpublished when we have a provenance from creation to deposition in an archive like those at Alamy and Getty Images. --RAN (talk) 20:16, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The original creative work is the photographic negative in these cases Yeah, but "creative work" is different from the "published work" and what matters here is the later, not the former. Nowhere have I said the images should be deleted because they aren't "creative works" or whatever. That's not what the DR is about. And no, the photographic negative doesn't have to contain a copyright symbol, the published product containing the photograph does. Negatives don't usually contain copyright symbols anyway. Let alone the name of the copyright holder, Why would though when they are just copies of the image taken by the camera (which doesn't put either one on the negative to begin with)? It's not like if some random person takes photographs of their family vacation to their local camera shop to be developed that they put that information on them either, because it's not "publication." But in this case we don't even know if these photographs come from negatives or where published somewhere else before. So your whole rant about it is totally pointless anyway. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:55, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: As in all these Allentown PA deletion requests, there simply isn't enough information given to verify the provenance of any of these images. —holly {chat} 22:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:1930s_Photographs,_Allentown,_Pennsylvania&oldid=852487655"