Commons:Deletion requests/File:Lho-133A.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.
Although the Warren Commission subpoenaed and published this image, the copyright is still presumably held by Marina Oswald Porter. There's no evidence this photo has ever been released under a free license. Kelly (talk) 01:39, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. What you say, yes, but: Indeed the photographer would be the natural copyright holder, but it was widely published by early 1964. Back then per US law a copyright had to be actively asserted and registered on first publication to be valid. So if not {{PD-USGov}}, it would be {{PD-US-no notice}}. A bit convoluted (that it might have been first published without explicit permission of the photographer may be another unpleasantness); Oswald never seems to have applied for any copyright on it, and since it has been in print for decades it is too late to do so now. Per my understanding of US copyright law, no valid copyright so PD per US law. -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:53, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Given the possibly disputed nature of the copyright claim, would it be better to treat this image as non-free, but historic? Kelly (talk) 02:02, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Who is disputing it? Note that we go by status according to copyright law (which is not always the same as what we think might be the most just or most sensible or most defensive of intellectual property). The image is already tagged as PD-US-no notice, which I think is an accurate indicator for the reason for PD status per US law. From everything I've seen, it is PD and can stay on Commons. -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:55, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- Who is disputing it, indeed. If the author/creator, who is known, has not disputed after so many years of publication and such widespread publication/re-publication we should avoid creating a dispute when none is even remotely anticipated. Consider the fact that if the legal system subpoenaed this photo for use by the Warren Commission this is the same legal system that seeks to protect the interests of authors/creators, implication being that there is an overriding public policy argument for dissemination. In sum, Keep.--Brian Dell (talk) 20:17, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Keep, this image was created in the U.S., and was first published in the U.S. before 1964 without a © notice. This makes it ineligible for copyright in the U.S., its country of origin. – Quadell (talk) 13:02, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Keep, if ths image is already in google search, then I think that this has been published. Ollygo (talk)
