Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:PD Vietnam Government

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.

Article 21 of the decree No. 100/2006/NP-CD refered to in the license template says "Administrative documents specified in Clause 2, Article 15 of the Intellectual Property Law include documents issued by state agencies, political organizations, socio-political organizations, sociopolitical-professional organizations, social organizations, socio-professional organizations, economic organizations, people’s armed forces units and other organizations defined by law." The template is poorly worded, because it not explicitely says that a document must still be a "legal documents, administrative documents and other documents in the judicial domain".

From the template {{PD-VietnamGov}} you can get the impression that all documents released by such organizations are not protected by copyright, but thats untrue because the words I underlined above are not mentioned in the template.

The following photos, all recently uploaded by one user who got this wrong impression I think, not fall inside this category, it is not documents as specified in the copyright law Article 15.

--Martin H. (talk) 02:37, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I find your logic quite confusing. They cannot exist because...why? Buffs (talk) 06:16, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because {{PD-VietnamGov}} is used wrong. Any work "issued by issued by state agencies, political organizations..." and so on must be a work according to Article 15, alinea 2. Thats legal documents, administrative documents and other documents in the judicial domain. This photos are not legal documents. --Martin H. (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These images have legally right: Because according to the decree No. 100/2006/ND-CP of September 21, 2006, Article 2, "Subjects of application: This decree applies to Vietnamese organizations and individuals; and foreign organizations and individuals engaged in activities relating to copyright and related rights". Article 8, alinea 1, "Authors means persons who personally create part of or the entire literary, artistic or scientific works". All images have captured by individuals and organizations in Vietnam and accepted by Vietnamese Government also protected by Vietnamese law. These images are completely lawful when add permission: PD-VietnamGov.Dokientrung (talk)

Of course this decree applies to organizations and individuals. Because all organizations and individuals have a copyright! We not collect copyrighted works here but public domain works, thats the opposite of what you just said. So why should Article 15 of the law apply to this works and excemt them from copyright? --Martin H. (talk) 02:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The permission PD-VietnamGov can be used in these cases because according Intellectual Property Law of Vietnamese Government: all organizations and individuals have the right to use documents and belongs to public if respect the personal rights of authors. These images have exactly confirmed author's name in Author - Summary.Dokientrung (talk)
You refer to fair use? The files have copyrights and you cant use something that has copyright for commercial purposes unless the copyright holder gave permission. Thats what we require on Commons, free reuse for any purpose. See Commons:Project scope#Required licensing terms. The copyright exemption of Article 15 is not applicable because this is not aministrative documents as specified in Clause 2, Article 15 of the Intellectual Property Law. This files are simply copyrighted and not ok to upload on Commons. Maybe on Wikipedia under fair use. --Martin H. (talk) 03:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You don't understand Vietnam Intellectual Property Law, in this Law: The following forms of use of published works without obtaining permission and paying any royalties, remuneration: a) Self - reproducing one single copy for the purposes of science research and teaching; b) Reasonable quoting works without alteration of their contents for commentary or for illustration in one’s own works; c) Quoting from a work without alteration of their contents for use in articles, periodic journals, radio and television programs and documentary films; d) Quoting from a work for teaching in schools without alteration of the contents not for commercial purposes; e) Copying a work for archives in libraries for the purposes of research. I uploaded these images without any money purpose, only support for research and education. I think that's the main purpose of Common Wiki to encourage the development of knowledge. In Vietnam, all documents have been used free and belongs public for education purpose if respect the personal rights of authors.Dokientrung (talk)
I understand this perfectly, but this is a free content project. Use only for educational purposes or reuse only for quoting a copyrighted work is great, but it is not free. It is fair use, and it is forbidden on Commons. See the first point at Commons:Project scope#Non-allowable license terms. --Martin H. (talk) 03:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your idea. I uploaded these images to common and public for free and education purpose. Then, everyone in Common Wiki can use these images to add to any titles in Wikipedia and download too, of course the copyright can be respected. That's Vietnam Intellectual Property Law imply and also my purpose. Do I have any misunderstand? (talk)
Files on Commons must be free for money making purposes, everywhere, worldwide. --Martin H. (talk) 04:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, that's the idea I tried to told you. Vietnamese Law allows use of published works without obtaining permission and paying any money if you use these images for non-commercial works for all over the world. Therefore, these images can be added PD-VietnamGov. Dokientrung (talk)

In hope you understand my ideas. Can you remove the "Deletion requests" in these images? I think it's so unfair if these images be deleted because you and I have something misunderstand each other. All authors of these images always want to develop knowledge in Vietnam and all over the world. Thanks and have a good day! Dokientrung (talk)

Again, I think you not know or not understand what this project is about. You said: "if you use these images for non-commercial works". Thats forbidden on Commons. We not accept files here that you can only use for non-commercial purposes. Files must be free for commercial purposes too. Read about free content. --Martin H. (talk) 13:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Vietnam Intellectual Property Law correctly wrote that all documents can use free if these support for education and research purpose (have to respect the personal rights of authors, of course). I think that law is quite simple to understand. These images I uploaded satisfy both Common Wiki's content and Vietnamese Law. That's all. The Common Wiki I satisfied, the Vietnamese Law either. Dokientrung (talk)
I say it a last time: Files on Commons must not only be free for education, but also for commercial purposes! Wikimedia Commons is not sattisfied, its NOT free content, its a violation of our licensing policy. --Martin H. (talk) 14:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
{{PD-VietnamGov}} is not used in Vietnamese Wikipedia since 2008, you can see at vi:Bản mẫu:PVCC-CPVN and vi:Thảo luận Bản mẫu:PVCC-CPVN (Martin H. can read if use Google Translate). This template is only used in Vietnamese Wikisource for legal documents, administrative documents and other documents in the judicial domain and official translations of these documents of Vietnam Government. So this template in Commons should be deleted. Tranminh360 (talk) 23:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Images on Commons must be free for commerical use. I hope that Dokientrung finally understands that.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:31, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.

See Template talk:PD-VietnamGov#Legal Documents. The full original of this statement in Vietnamese is "Văn bản pháp quy", rough translation to English is "Legal text documents". The template currently only using in Vietnamese Wikisource with official "Legal text documents" by VietnamGov, not the photos. Almost photos (especially logo and emblem) tagged with this template should be remove since it clearly copyright violation due misreading the content of statement in English translation. In the case badly tagged, they need to be sort in other category by correct licenses. Also a warning text should be added to template, make it only using for a scan of text, prevent any wrong photos upload in future.

minhhuy (talk) 03:26, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]
  • the license tag for file Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan 2012 was added by a sockpuppet and not by the author (who took the picture), so it does not fall into this category. The false license tag has been removed. Grenouille vert (talk) 04:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed from the list. Also removed some photos created before 1960 after change to correct license(s). --minhhuy (talk) 04:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Please pay close attention to license tags added by User:Musée Annam without concerns from the original uploaders. I already found some other images with similar issues (picture of Francois Hollande, for example). If you want to delete a contribution made by an uploader, please make sure about the validity of your reasoning. I haven't used Wikicommons for a very long time, had I not received the notification about the nomination for deletion of my picture, my contribution would have been unreasonably erased. This might be the case for other contributors, so it is your responsibility to help us avoid that situation. Grenouille vert (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep the following:

Which are eligible for "{{PD-Vietnam}}", some others might be as well. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:12, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also some People's Army files might be old enough for "{{PD-Vietnam}}" but I don't have the time to check each of these files individually. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of Vietnamese Nationalist Party (1929 - 1945).svg is "

This work is ineligible for copyright and therefore in the public domain because it consists entirely of information that is common property and contains no original authorship.
" and I suspect that several more are, a lot of these files are also just badly tagged. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:22, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnamese government awards files are self-drawn images. Low Image Quality. Against removal. --Kei (talk) 05:32, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most of South Vietnam (Republic of Vietnam) branches or divisions' flag were created in 1955, this included some emblems and badges. Those could all be eligible, but I might be wrong. Emperofvietilia 06:22, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some of them:

There are more but it took too much time. However, I'll keep updating it in a few days. Emperofvietilia 06:28, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I was asked on my talk page: Most of these images are, as it is usual poorly tagged, that's logical. Anyway, we usually consider emblems of governmental agencies or military branches are PD-Gov, as these images can be found on public domain legal documents, as long it is not possible to find conflicting legislation. Of course that is an assumption, but if we do not do that, it is not possible to show official emeblems for most countries in the world. In additon, copyright does not play a role for official insignia, as their use is generally banned outside educational porposes.--Antemister (talk) 07:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Those files may meet the conditions for PD-simple (with flag only have some colors). My point here is all the files need the correction license(s) and avoid abuse the PD-VietnamGov, since it should only use for "legal text documents". Vietnamese Goverment may keep the copright protection with all the symbols using in those documents. --minhhuy (talk) 08:12, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understands the misused and error during translation of the license(s). So are you suggesting that those file’s license(s) should be replace with a more fitting one, to be create with a new license specific for them, or simply just removed them. Emperofvietilia 15:08, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to keep those files which others users listed above (as long as we can choose the right tag for them). I also removed the deletion tag for severals files which already replaced by more suitable licenses template by myself. But still, there are so many files which I believe they was uploaded due wrong understanding about the "legal text" (intentionally or not), such as the emblem and logo files of modern administrative units, and many history photos taken after 1960 but no author permission given as well. Therefore, to reply your question, I think "both". And the template itself need a notice about the scope of license, prevent more violation photos uploaded under PV-VietnamGov. --minhhuy (talk) 15:47, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I had added a request to change the template that reminds users in the future to use the template for text document's images purposes only. And as for most of the flags and emblems, they all seem to be solely created by the authors of the images and not actual images that could have any copyright concern. So could those tags be removed without replacing it with any other tags or any other mean? Emperofvietilia 20:50, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep my road sign files. The majority of them do not contain anything original enough for copyright, while others with more complex images are taken from the Vienna Convention (Vietnam is a recent signatory) or other unoriginal sources. I will re-license them if this license is deemed inappropriate. Fry1989 eh? 18:46, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep: If the license used is improper, then it should be replaced and fixed with the proper one; we shouldn't jump the gun by mass-deleting since many of the files listed are in the public domain due to their age or simplicity, but have just been mis-licensed is all. Anyway, I went ahead and fixed the licenses on some of the files. While I'm all for deleting copyrighted files, we first should identify which ones should be deleted and which ones kept before carelessly mass-deleting them all on a whim. – Illegitimate Barrister (talkcontribs), 20:36, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Quite a few of these seem to be merely mis-tagged—maybe by people who thought the template was for any & all images that are PD in Vietnam, rather than being specific to the Vietnamese government. I haven’t looked at many of them, but beside the flags & traffic signs mentioned above I notice things like centuries-old ceramics, more insignia with simple geometry or conventional emblems, and other items that I doubt would pass any but the lowest TOO. From what I’ve seen I would certainly oppose a mass deletion without such files being sorted out.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Emperofvietilia, Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy: I try a cleanup within the files I am affiliated. Anyway, reading the PDVietnamGov template, it states that not only "legal texts", but in general any "documents issued by state agencies" are in the PDs, with includes also documents like annual reports of state agencies, which usually includes emblems. Anyway, I a strict opponent of seperating the PD-Gov and PD-old template for each country, as this often causes such problems.--Antemister (talk) 15:35, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep:the passport.It's a kind of administrative license,belongs to the category of the administrative documents. And according to Commons:2D copying , 2D copying does not generate any new copyright because the resulting work is defined entirely by the original work.--Jacky Cheung (talk) 14:08, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep File:安南志原.pdf File:竹齋仙翁.jpg, old enough to be PD in the entire world.--Roy17 (talk) 23:46, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Similar like the URAA mass deletion where we also mass deleted a lot of files, I decide here also that we should keep the files and do more specific deletion requests (eg by Army Flags, by users and so on). --Sanandros (talk) 13:47, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]