Wikipedia talk:Public domain/Archive 2014

Input wanted: orphan works
We're looking for examples of how the unavailability of orphan works (works under copyright where the rightsholder is unknown or uncontactable) hurts the mission of the Wikimedia projects. Please see WP:VPM. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 17:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Non-US government works
I haven't found explicit statements about it, but probably I've just missed them. Works of Ukrainian government are in public domain in Ukraine according to the Ukrainian law. But does it mean that is also in public domain in USA? --DixonD (talk) 11:28, 15 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Probably not. There's some argument about it, but Commons has generally decided to get explicit notification that they are PD world-wide. See Works by non-U.S. governments declared to be in the public domain globally (which is proposed, and has a lot of argument on the talk page, but I'd say it represents the situation as it stands.)--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Copyright term table
I've assembled a new table giving the copyright term in the context of creation and publication dates. I tried to make the presentation more clear than the other ones I've seen; I'm posting it here first in case I made any errors. I haven't made tables yet for foreign works or architecture, but I can work on those later. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 02:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Works registered or first published in the United States

Sound recordings

Green - All works are in the public domain due to copyright expiring Yellow - Some works are in the public domain due to copyright expiring Orange - Some works are in the public domain due to failure to conform to technicalities Red - No works are in the public domain

Copyright term PD - All works are in the public domain due to copyright expiring 95 - Copyright expires 95 years after publication S - Copyright expires 70 years after author's death; but if the work is anonymous, made for hire, or the author or the author's death date is unknown, copyright expires on the earlier of 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation S+ - The later of S and 31 Dec 2047 ??? - Copyright term depends on state laws

Conditions R - Copyright was renewed in the 28th year after publication N - A compliant copyright notice was included N* - A compliant copyright notice was included, or the work was registered within five years of publication D - Author died or later U - The work is anonymous, made for hire, or the author or the author's death date is unknown

Notes
 * Works of employees of the U. S. federal government are always in the public domain regardless of the table above.
 * Copyright terms for sound recordings, architecture, and works first published outside the US are different than the standard.
 * Works registered up to 1977 count as published.

Sources: Cornell chart, File:PD-US table.svg, WP:PD

Birth records, state of Michigan
In accordance with state laws of Michigan, birth records (but not death or marriage) records held by counties are not allowed to be released to the general public for 100 years unless the person requesting the information has evidence that the person has died (such as a newspaper obituary) for the supposed protection of the person in question. Once the 100-year term has expired, the birth records are available for such uses as genealogy.

Such may be the law in other states. Pbrower2a (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Two areas not particularly well covered here
(i) works by the United Nations, and its subsidiaries. (ii) digital scans of old works.

These two come together in for instance The World Digital Library, which has some connection with UNESCO (and Library of Congress).

I'm looking at a work originally written in 1521, but this is a French translation of it, from about 1525. Document itself is held at Yale University Library. My question is, what copyright restrictions are there, if any, on uploading any page, such as this page or this one to wikipedia/wikimedia?

Unbuttered parsnip (talk) mytime= Sat 21:40, wikitime=  13:40, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

The "sweat of the brow" rule applies. A photograph of a public-domain work that implies little effort to create a copy aside from getting access is hardly copyrightable. The simple snapshot isn't much of an effort, and neither is minor cropping or enhancing. What is copyrightable is a collection of photographs that implies some sophisticated selection and extensive commentary (which would make the collection a hybrid of photography and a literary effort.

Professional photography, even by a mass-market photographer, is copyrighted even if the photographer is simply an employee of the photographer with little formal training in photography. Thus wedding or baby/child pictures taken by such a photographer are copyrighted. Persons photographed effectively assign the negatives to the corporation that photographs people and pay a fee to get reproductions. The photo company has expensive equipment that people taking snapshots would not ordinarily use and has costs of transportation of a photographer, however slightly-skilled, cost the 'creator' something. A basic rule: if money is involved in creating the work and someone makes a living by doing the work, it is professional.

Turning the pages of a book (even if one gets access, which may be difficult) and clicking a shutter is not much work, so it fails the "sweat of the brow" test. It's not in the same league of complexity as writing, translating, or composing. That said, adding captions to pictures and adding such editorial content as a foreword, table of contents, and index -- and of course setting the pages for publication -- creates a copyrightable BOOK -- a literary work even if the contents are mostly pictures.Pbrower2a (talk) 03:17, 17 December 2014 (UTC)