Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gerrit Jan Heijn.jpg

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.

File:Gerrit Jan Heijn.jpg

The source site has the notice:

"These photos depict the early days of Albert Heijn stores as well as aspects of Albert Heijn's family and professional life, from the start of his career up to and including his retirement. All photos can be downloaded for publication free of copyright."

That cannot be correct. The subject, Gerrit Jan Heijn, was born in 1931 and died in 1987. It is likely that all photographs of him are still under copyright and certain that all taken after 1945 are. The source site cannot possibly have gotten all of the photographers to declare their images PD. I think this is simply a case of a person at the source site not understanding copyright law. Note that source site is a memorial to the subject's brother, but that does not change the status of this or any of the images there.

Also, the words "for publication" limit the uses to which these images can be put. That is not a license for any use anywhere as required by Commons.

Finally, the image appears at http://www.levensmiddelenkrant.nl/2024/gerrit-jan-heijn-had-kunnen-ontsnappen with an explicit copyright notice.

The same reasoning applies to File:Albert Heijn voor de Albert Heijn Museumwinkel, Zaanse Schans.jpg.

     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:31, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Point by point:

The subject Gerrit Jan Heijn died in 1987, but he is not the owner of the copyright. According to http://inmemoriam.ahold.com/for-the-media/photos the Ahold corporation is the owner of the copyright and the statement says it is free to use.

The words are "downloading for publication" so publication reflects on downloading, not on the words "free of copyright"

The image in the Levensmiddelenkrant is not the image being discussed here. Check the glance of his eyes and you will see.

The same applies for File:Albert Heijn voor de Albert Heijn Museumwinkel, Zaanse Schans.jpg.

Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 13:05, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

You assert that the Ahold corporation owns the copyrights, but give us no basis for understanding that. The images on the site include family photographs -- are we to believe that the Ahold corporation owns those copyrights also?

I see that the Google translation of the Dutch is subtly different from the English above, it says "This material is made available for publication and duty free download along with the captions." I would be interested in having an uninvolved Dutch speaker translate

"Hier vindt u foto's van Albert Heijn, vanaf het begin van z'n carrière tot na z'n pensionering. Dit beeldmateriaal is rechtenvrij beschikbaar gesteld ter publicatie en samen met de onderschriften te downloaden."

User:Trijnstel, can you help here?

My problem with this is that "made available for publication" is not a free license as it limits the uses to "publication" which implies print media in American English. It would certainly rule out making t-shirts or plates, for example. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:43, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

No basis for understanding that? The photos are from the ahold.com website. Family photographs? In the entire set one or two could be ambiguous. Could be, but they are not used here.

The english text is present on the website: "These photos depict the early days of Albert Heijn stores as well as aspects of Albert Heijn's family and professional life, from the start of his career up to and including his retirement. All photos can be downloaded for publication free of copyright."

In Dutch publicatie means disclosure, so it doesn't rule out making a t-shirt. I am not a native English speaker so if you say that publication is limited to printed media, I have to believe you. But keep in mind, Ahold is a Dutch company and in the Dutch text they say publicatie and do not limit that.

Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:17, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

For me, the fact that Ahold, as you agree is possible, ignores copyright on some of the photos, casts a significant doubt over the copyright status of all of them. However, I will shut up now and let our colleagues decide this. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:29, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

But we don't know. Ahold is an international retailer and has a legal department from here to over there. It would be very surprising if they ignored copyright on some of these pictures, especially when these are the pictures that are dear to them. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 12:57, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Exactly. "But we don't know". It is up to you to prove beyond a significant doubt that the images are free. We see large companies making incorrect copyright claims and lack of copyright claims all the time. Since some of the images here that are claimed to be free are almost certainly not free, we must assume that someone at Ahold just wrote the permission without reference to the legal department. Certainly no lawyer would have written a permission that was as vague as this one. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:30, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

@Jameslwoodward: Sure. I've translated it literally & could have made some mistakes of course. But I tried my best.

"Here you can find photos of Albert Heijn, from the beginning of his career until his retirement. These images, free of copyright, are made available for publication and can be downloaded together with the captions."

Trijnstel_talk 23:37, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

---

Deleted: Jim is correct. We can't accept those files per com:PCP. Natuur12 (talk) 21:00, 4 March 2015 (UTC)