Commons:Deletion requests/File:Justice Party 1920s.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
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.

(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

The file gives the source as the book Justice Party 1916-1937 by Rajaraman. But this link suggests that the book was published only in 1988 and hence, is not in pubic domain.-Ravichandar84 (talk) 17:39, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is not a "personal album photo" - a large group of people posing in a formal setting - so prior publication, in 1920s, is quite probable. But then probability is not a substitute for hard facts. It may be deleted because information is absent, not because it was "published only in 1988". NVO (talk) 08:06, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, I've never claimed that this is a personal album. The author of the book could very well have published an already published photograph. But then, it is also probable that the author could have taken the picture from someone's personal collection or the archives of the Justice Party. To prove that the image is not in copyright anymore rests with the uploader. But the book provided as source had been published in 1988 and unless the book and year in which the photograph was first published can be established and it could be proven that the picture had been first published prior to 1951 (as per Indian Copyright Law), it ought to be deleted.-Ravichandar84 (talk) 05:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, publication does not require a book or a publishing house, but it requires a date, right. And this "publication" was pusblished only in 1988 and is in copyright in India.-Ravichandar84 (talk) 17:09, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Peter Kuiper, are you sure that this photo was in circulation? How come do you know that? Is it not possible that It could have taken by the author of the book from someone's private collection with limited rights?-Ravichandar84 (talk) 02:04, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is a group photo; about 25 distinguished people posed for it, of course they had copies made. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 06:53, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is this the definition of "publication" as per the Indian copyright law?-Ravichandar84 (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you. I do not want to doubt the image just because I want to doubt the image :) So  Keep --Sreejith K (talk) 18:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Such an answer does not behove of a responsible member of the community. Wikipedia takes copyright seriously and the onus is on the uploader. We cannot have images of ambiguous copyright.-Ravichandar84 (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I saw a few other places whether the same image is used and all claims that photo was taken/published in 1920s ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]). If the photo was taken in 1920s, there is no way the photo would have waited 20-25 years before going public, considering the fact that many of the people in the image were quite famous at that time. Public domain images does not require a precise publishing date unless there is significant doubt about the copyright. --Sreejith K (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Photo published in 1920s in India thus in PD Blackcat (talk) 19:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]