Commons:Deletion requests/File:Louvre Museum Wikimedia Commons.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.
There is no freedom of panorama in France. Louvre Pyramid is copyrighted and its architect is still living. The pyramid is here not de minimis, on the contrary, the photo is used in multiple projects for illustrating Louvre Pyramid. Copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 18:32, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Opposed. Looks de minimus to me. --Robert.Allen (talk) 19:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Opposed, per Robert.Allen. The scale factor to the metric tends to zero. Coldcreation (talk) 21:01, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment When using an image to illustrate something in that image, de minimis is no defence. That is true regardless of how unimportant the feature is for the image itself. This image seems to be an image of the Louvre. You cannot get a similar image of it without including the pyramid, so the presence of the latter is incidental. The problem is not in the photographer, but in that the pyramid was placed in this way. Can you get a monopoly on images of out of copyright architecture by placing your copyrighted work in front of them? I do not think that is the intention of the law. Remove the image from the pyramid articles (use a close up fair use image instead, where allowed), and be done. --LPfi (talk) 08:15, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment This is, in my view, a poor argument. The photograph clearly is of the plaza as a whole and not specifically the pyramids and therefore is "de minimis". Our use of the photograph, to illustrate the pyramids and their location in the Louvre, is irrelevant. Rather, what is relevant is the photo's explicit content. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.136.119.169 (talk) 12:04, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Opposed - Another instance of copyright paranoia - it's part of the landscape. With the myriad of similar photos taken since its construction, is there some precedent copyright violation case out there for a similar image? If so, there might be a reason to delete this image, but if not, there's no 'case' for deletion. THEPROMENADER 17:08, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per above comments (a good faith nom but a bit of a stretch). Randy Kryn (talk) 17:13, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose probably the zillion time this is discussed about. - Benh (talk) 18:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment :I have closed many Louvre pyramid-theme deletion requests both as deleted and as kept (for example Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Louvre Pyramid) and here the pyramid is too prominently depicted. Under full resolution copyrighted details are well seen. Taivo (talk) 06:59, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- Quote: "This is a featured picture on Wikimedia Commons (Featured pictures) and is considered one of the finest images." And there you have it. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:38, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- We have deleted good, featured and valuable images in the past due to copyright violation. Even media of the day has been deleted. Taivo (talk) 12:52, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Quote: "This is a featured picture on Wikimedia Commons (Featured pictures) and is considered one of the finest images." And there you have it. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:38, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose This image is nearly identical to the "de minimis" example given on this page, but merely higher resolution. It is clearly an image of the plaza as a whole and not specifically the pyramids. - 69.136.119.169 11:54, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Border of de minimis goes between these two images. Taivo (talk) 12:52, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Can you elaborate on how that was determined? I'd be satisfied with either something in French law, or if you can point me to page showing consensus among Wikipedians. Also, in essence implies that for a given shot composition of the Louvre courtyard, there is a "maximum resolution" you can use before crossing from free licensing to non-commercial licensing which is disallowed on Wikimedia Commons. That is fairly ridiculous in my view. In any case, many of the files ultimately not deleted in previous deletion requests were saved because of the Terreaux case where when copyright works are an unavoidable element of a picture, and the picture is of a more general subject, then the picture is fine. Many of the surviving Louvre pyramid photographs were ultimately kept because they were images of the Louvre courtyard as whole and not specifically the pyramids. This picture is nearly identical to those examples... these include images that you yourself ultimately decided not to delete. I do not see how this photograph is any different.128.196.188.196 23:06, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- The pyramid in file:Louvre at night centered.jpg and file:Paris July 2011-27a.jpg are visually lower than Louvre, these files were kept as de minimis. The pyramid on nominated file is visually higher than Louvre, it is copyright violation. That's the difference. You asked about maximum resolution – there's no such resolution. Taivo (talk) 07:25, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
- Can you elaborate on how that was determined? I'd be satisfied with either something in French law, or if you can point me to page showing consensus among Wikipedians. Also, in essence implies that for a given shot composition of the Louvre courtyard, there is a "maximum resolution" you can use before crossing from free licensing to non-commercial licensing which is disallowed on Wikimedia Commons. That is fairly ridiculous in my view. In any case, many of the files ultimately not deleted in previous deletion requests were saved because of the Terreaux case where when copyright works are an unavoidable element of a picture, and the picture is of a more general subject, then the picture is fine. Many of the surviving Louvre pyramid photographs were ultimately kept because they were images of the Louvre courtyard as whole and not specifically the pyramids. This picture is nearly identical to those examples... these include images that you yourself ultimately decided not to delete. I do not see how this photograph is any different.128.196.188.196 23:06, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Border of de minimis goes between these two images. Taivo (talk) 12:52, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Kept: The image is of the Louvre, the courtyard & the current entrance, de minimus as less than 1/6 of the image area was occupied by entrance feature. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:06, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
