Commons:Deletion requests/File:RM F32717 Rudolf and Rudolfine Menzel at dog show in Austria.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Лицензия указана ошибочно: снимок сделан в Австрии, основания для перехода в PD неизвестны -- Tomasina (talk) 07:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

License is incorrect: photo taken in Austria, reasons for transfer to PD unknown
  •  Keep I believe this qualifies as a simple photograph (lichtbild - see discussion at Template talk:PD-Austria) which would be PD if it were "published more than 50 years ago or it was taken more than 50 years ago and never published within 50 years of its creation", which IMO is likely in this case. I've updated the license to {{PD-Austria}} but if the discussion disagrees the file can still be deleted. Consigned (talk) 16:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • This would not be a simple photograph by Austrian law @Rosenzweig: to check. Abzeronow (talk) 00:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Case law from Austria's highest court [1][2][3] says that photos, regardless if by professional or by amateur photographers, are photographic works (with 70 years pma) „wenn man sagen kann, ein anderer Fotograf hätte das Lichtbild möglicherweise anders gestaltet“ (“when you can say that another photographer might have possibly designed the photograph differently”). So basically every single image. --Rosenzweig τ 10:44, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Rosenzweig thanks, I wonder if {{PD-Austria}} and COM:Austria could be made a little more clear? Some countries do have a more generous distinction of simple photograph vs artistic photograph, and these two pages have a lot of room in between their definition of simple photograph (passport, satellite) and artistic (studio, lighting, poses) where your definition would fall in the middle. BTW I can't find the discussion of Lichtbild that I was trying to link at Template talk:PD-Austria, but it was from around 2006. Consigned (talk) 11:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]