Commons:Deletion requests/File:Homo floresiensis, Neanderthal and Homo sapiens woman.Musée des Confluences.jpg
No freedom of panorama in France. FunkMonk (talk) 02:20, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
Question
[edit]
I am the author of the photography. J'ai posé la question aux conservateurs du museum. Je vous prie d'attendre le retour de vacances, au 3 septembre. Par ailleurs, voici l'extrait de l'article de Wikipédia qui mentionne les réalisations à caractère didactique comme ne tombant pas sous le coup de la loi encadrant la liberté de panorama en France..: I asked the curators of the museum. I ask you to wait for the return of holidays, on September 3rd. Moreover, here is the excerpt from the Wikipedia article which mentions didactical achievements as not falling under the scope of the law framing the freedom of panorama in France.
Dans la plupart des pays, la protection du droit d'auteur est reconnue aux architectes et sculpteurs sur leurs œuvres quand elles présentent une dimension artistique (ce qui en exclut, par exemple, les reconstitutions scientifiques d'appareils ou vaisseaux, d'ADN agrandi, ou d'animaux préhistoriques d'une portée exclusivement didactique).
Yours sincerely, (Ismoon (talk) 16:17, 6 August 2018 (UTC))
- Seconded, wait until at least 3 September for the museum curators to reply to the inquiry. Also, provide evidence that "no FOP" in France does, in fact, cover les reconstitutions scientifiques [...] d'animaux préhistoriques d'une portée exclusivement didactique ("scientific reconstructions of prehistoric animals with a purely didactic puropse"), which seems to apply pretty well to this case. --Dbachmann (talk) 14:05, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- In this case, FOP might even be irrelevant, because this museum is not necessarily a public place. So what matters is whether the artist would allow such photos to be CC licensed. FunkMonk (talk) 14:23, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- I have no idea whether the passage cited by Ismoon is, in fact, French law. But it explicitly excludes "scientific representations of prehistoric animals" from being protected property of the artist. Could you please, since it is your deletion request, and you appear to no longer uphold your original rationale of "no FOP" , present some evidence either way whether this is or is not the case under French law? --Dbachmann (talk) 13:57, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- In this case, FOP might even be irrelevant, because this museum is not necessarily a public place. So what matters is whether the artist would allow such photos to be CC licensed. FunkMonk (talk) 14:23, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Elisabeth Daynès, author of the reconstruction work is the only one who can agree. The copyright applies as on an artistic work. The image may be temporarily withdrawn until consent is obtained. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- ok, so this is no longer related to FOP. So, my question was, under French law, is a "scientific reconstruction of a prehistoric animal" protected as an artistic sculpture, or is it not? --Dbachmann (talk) 14:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, you understand correctly. For an original fossil skull no problem, for a sculpture or drawing it is the same copyright as a work of art. But there are also restrictions related to museum scenography. To know everything about museums and photographic rights in France here is a link. Here --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:39, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, you understand correctly. For an original fossil skull no problem, for a sculpture or drawing it is the same copyright as a work of art. But there are also restrictions related to museum scenography. To know everything about museums and photographic rights in France here is a link. Here --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:39, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- ok, so this is no longer related to FOP. So, my question was, under French law, is a "scientific reconstruction of a prehistoric animal" protected as an artistic sculpture, or is it not? --Dbachmann (talk) 14:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Elisabeth Daynès, author of the reconstruction work is the only one who can agree. The copyright applies as on an artistic work. The image may be temporarily withdrawn until consent is obtained. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Response of Ismoon. Here is the mail I receved from the museum :
Je reviens vers vous suite à votre demande ci-dessous adressée à Christian Sermet. Nous ne sommes pas au fait des usages et de la politique de Wikipédia et Creative Commons concernant la diffusion d’images.
Je peux cependant vous confirmer que, pour notre part, nous ne sommes pas opposés à la diffusion de cette photographie dans le cadre de la documentation liée à la page du musée.
Julia Blondeau-Brézillon. Chargée de relations publiques et presse | musée des Confluences. julia.blondeau-brezillon@museedesconfluences.fr. 86 quai Perrache | CS 30180 | 69285 Lyon cedex 02. www.museedesconfluences.fr
Translation :
I come back to you following your request below addressed to Christian Sermet. We are not aware of the uses and politics of Wikipedia and Creative Commons regarding the dissemination of images.
However, I can confirm that, for our part, we are not opposed to the dissemination of this photograph as part of the documentation related to the museum page.
Julia Blondeau-Brézillon. Public Relations and Press Officer | Museum of Confluences. julia.blondeau-brezillon@museedesconfluences.fr. 86 quai Perrache | CS 30180 | 69285 Lyon cedex 02. www.museedesconfluences.fr.
I will try to contact the author Elisabeth Daynès and the responsable of these questions. I note, moreover, that the page "Elisabeth Daynès" on Wikipedia in French, is illustrated with three images, of three different authors... Are these images of a different nature from this one? Best Regards. (Ismoon (talk) 13:19, 4 September 2018 (UTC)).
- I have the answer of the artist :
Mr. Moison,Merci pour votre message. En effet, Mme Mathilde Renard de notre agence photo, en copie à cet email, nous avait également transmis votre requête. Je suis surprise qu'en tant que contributeur à des articles documentés et illustrés vous ne soyez pas au courant de droits d'auteurs quand vous utilisez des photos d'oeuvres exposées dans des musées notamment. En tant qu'artiste des oeuvres qui sont sur la photo en référence je suis en droit d'en refuser la publication. Cette image ne reflétant pas mon travail et le dévalorisant même de part la mauvaise qualité de la photo (angle de vue, cadrage, lumière, etc.) je ne vous donne pas mon accord de la publier sur quelconque réseau ou support médiatique. Je travaille énormément pour transmettre une émotion et insuffler la "vie" à mes sculptures, et sur la photo que vous voulez utiliser tout est mort et terne. Elisabeth Daynes
So, Elisabeth Daynes asks for the withdrawal of the photo. Can we do this quickly?
(Ismoon (talk) 20:08, 7 September 2018 (UTC))
Deleted: per nomination + author's request. Ruthven (msg) 17:37, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
