Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Lette (Coesfeld)

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:Lette (Coesfeld)

Contemporary artworks, I'm afraid we cannot keep it on Commons unless a permission by the artist is obtained.

A.Savin 00:46, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ich denke, wenn in einem Museum (wie dies hier geschehen ist) auf mehrfache Nachfrage von Seiten des Personals ausdrücklich darauf hingewiesen wird, dass das Fotografieren im Inneren des Hauses und in der Ausstellung ausdrücklich erlaubt sei, sollte diese Frage für den Fotografierenden damit eindeutig geklärt sein. Das Museum, das die Arbeiten des Künstlers ausstellt und auf dessen Wunsch hin der Öffentlichkeit auf Dauer präsentiert, sollte damit auch das Recht an der Veröffentlichung inne haben. Also somit entscheiden dürfen, ob das Ablichten und Nutzen hier erlaubt ist oder nicht! Die besten Grüße an Dich, Userkollege A. Savin. --Horst70 (talk) 14:30, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think if a museum (as it happened here) particularly mentions that photography inside the house and in the exhibition rooms is expressly allowed, when the museum staff confirms it, there is no copyright rules for the photographer. The museum, which exhibits the artist works and presents them to the public on a permanent basis at his request, should thus also have the right to publish them. So you can decide whether the photographing and use of it should be allowed here or not! Best regards to you, user colleague A. Savin. --Horst70 (talk) 14:30, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the museum doesn't hold the copyright, the artist does.

The artists give the museum or whoever owns the object the right to exhibit the artwork, and the museum or owner can chose to let people take photographs or not.

Taking photographs or copying artwork is fine for private use, but it's illegal to publish these copies and use them in any given way (such as profit).

Wikimedia Commons cannot host such copyrighted copies because files hosted here specifically have to be freely licensed for any type of use.

Some artworks can be published when they are exposed in the public domain on a permanent basis and the country has freedom of panorama laws. That is not the case for museums. If you want that to change then petition people in your country and convince your legislators to make it so :)

--Trougnouf (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Horst J. Meuter: photography and publication are different. The fact that the museum allows you and all visitors to photograph anything does not mean you or the visitors are allowed to publish your images of artistic works under commercial licensing. Commons requires files to be freely reusable even in commercial media (postcards, ads, commercial vlogs etc.). Copyright remains with the artist; the museum only holds physical ownership but they are not the creators of the work they own.

@Trougnouf: I don't think there will be any more changes to German freedom of panorama. They are the purported origin of the legal right, yet they have numerous rules for their FOP, as outlined at COM:FOP Germany. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:21, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Info Horst J. Meuter replied on my talk page roughly two weeks ago: "Hello, dear JWilz12345, Thank you very much for your report. I can now get back to you with a new piece of information. The museum contacted me again: they want to ask the artists if they would like to give permission. I will get back to you when I get some feedback. Best regards." JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:59, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, permission must be supplied for files to be undeleted. — Racconish ^💬 12:40, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]