Commons:Deletion requests/Photos from Magyar Rendőr

This deletion debate 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.

Photos from Magyar Rendőr

As this deletion request shows there are huge problems with Fortepan. About 2960 (searching tag: "Adományozó: Magyar Rendőr") photos are uploaded from the Magyar Rendőr magazine (via Fortepan). The most of the pictures has unknown authors because we don't know the photographers of the magazine. The photos were published from 1947 till 1991 which means the Hungarian PMA+70 rule is not applicable yet. Please read the previous discourse and grin's essay. I'm sure the other Hungarian OTRS members will write their opinions too and we will try to filter the copyrighted pictures out. Bencemac (talk) 07:41, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

List of the files (be careful and do not try to load this paragraph: the list is huge)

Discussions

Deletion

 Support These images ought to be deleted. --grin ✎ 19:14, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose Taking the claim at face value, the newspaper donated those photos to Fortepan under CC. Are we distrusting Fortepan's claim? Or the newspaper's right to donate the photos? Both of those can be clarified by email (Fortepan is very irresponsible in their licensing practices, but so far have not lied about how they obtained their images); I don't think we should delete images with a legit free license claim just because we are unsure if the claim is a misundertanding on the donor's part. --Tgr (talk) 08:18, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

 Support It seems Hungarikusz Firkász already clarified by email and the photos have never been donated to Fortepan nor donated with the intent to make them free (according to the Hungarian Museum of Photography which received the photos from the newspaper -- see OTRS:10030920 where they say pretty clearly that they consider Fortepan to be infringing). So this seems like a pretty clear copyright violation. --Tgr (talk) 12:19, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

 Oppose. Ti unatkozó szerkesztőcskék, bár a képanyag bővítésében jeleskednétek így... Nincsen még egy olyan nemzet itt a Wikin, amely a saját történelmének képdokumentumait törli holmi zavaros indokok mentén, ráadásul olyan képgyűjteményt, amelyet egy nonprofit cég szó szerint a kukából halászott elő, megmentve az örök enyészettől és elfeledéstől. --Norden1990 (talk) 18:30, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Google translation from Hungarian: "You're bored by editors, though you might be excited about expanding your imagery ... There is no other nation here, the Wik's, which deletes the documentaries of your own history along with some confused reasons, and a collection of images that a nonprofit literally fished from the bun, Forever and ever."

@Norden1990: Not forever, just until the period 2068-2112.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:37, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

•  Support per nom, grin, and Tgr.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:03, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

• The deletion request is too large to look through. I would rather there had been a case book of typical samples and the discussion could be specific and set a precedent for which the consensus would be obvious. As the uploader, I feel disconnected from this DR, due to its size and unusual format, so I have no comment on a keep/delete decision apart from it seeming likely that with such a mass deletion we will end up deleting some public domain material based on age or having an unknown photographer, which appears to not have been researched or filtered from the proposed deletion set. I have seen no argument that the photographs may have been taken before 1947 but republished by the magazine. --Fæ (talk) 15:55, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

@Fæ: The photos were taken between 1947 and 1989. About 18 000 film rolles were taken by the photographers of the magazine but most of them have lost after 1989 ("1947 és 1989 között több mint 18 ezer tekercs Leica és 6x6-os filmet exponáltak a Magyar Rendőr magazin fotósai, a közel félmillió képkockán húszezer riport látható", source). Bencemac (talk) 18:18, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

@Fæ: I made the format more usual.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:25, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment Fæ brought up a point in this edit of differing licenses on 3 classes of files:
  • being anonymous

    None of these files qualify, they are all attributed to magazine "Magyar Rendőr", but really that is a cop-out. Whoever illicitly obtained the negatives from Magyar Rendőr knew (or should have known) that for each image there existed an identified photographer who had to be paid upon use, and the records of such existed in the offices of Magyar Rendőr.

  • taken before 1923

    None of these files qualify, they were all taken after 1923.

  • taken before 1946

    None of these files qualify, they were all taken after 1946.

•   — Jeff G. ツ 14:06, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Tagging photos from Magyar Rendőr

Who is in charge of tagging all the photos? Surely we're not mass-deleting without placing a discussion notice on the photos we can find. Also: Should we have a separate tag for the Magyar Rendőr/Fortepan photos that appear to be salvageable on Commons? I'm making this a separate subsection because it seems that it would attract a different discussion. --Closeapple (talk) 01:29, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

In this case I could make a list. Regrettably now I cannot because the AWB’s “wiki search” function can load only 1000 pages. But with the latest dump we can make the whole list with dates (but it is very big). Closeapple: Do you know somebody who may have the latest dump (for example because s/he is a bot owner)? Bencemac (talk) 11:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

If someone is willing to tag all photos that's cool. But the removal of clear copyvios should not be subject to jumping any hoops once the Commons community has been made aware of them. --Tgr (talk) 12:19, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

@Bencemac, Tgr: All such files are in Category:Photos from Magyar Rendőr and its children. The vast majority have new Template:Fortepan-en instead of Template:Fortepan, required to find & process them all. Tagging...   — Jeff G. ツ 16:41, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Pinging Closeapple too.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:42, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for tagging them! --Closeapple (talk) 16:50, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

@Closeapple:  Done, you're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:59, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

@Bencemac: Each cat is <1000 files, if we really need a list.   — Jeff G. ツ 17:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Shall I make a list? Would it help? Bencemac (talk) 17:05, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

@Bencemac: "list the files" IS part of the procedure at Commons:Deletion requests/Mass deletion request. The cats and search agree at 2,948 files.   — Jeff G. ツ 18:51, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

@Bencemac: Thank you for listing the files. I have moved the list up to be just under your nomination, as usual.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:31, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed closure

It seems pretty clear that the list that Jeff Bencemac gathered above (thanks!) needs to be deleted from Commons. I'm going to start deleting these unless new objections are raised, but I think there may be some images that could be transferred to local wikis under Fair Use policies. I note that huwiki appears to have an Exemption Policy Document (although I can't read the original, google translate does suggest that huwiki allows non-free content). I propose for a first run to delete only files with zero uses, and collect the others in lists to present to the sister projects where they are in use that accept non-free content. I'd normally just do this, but it is a very large list, so thought I'd double check for objections first. Storkk (talk) 15:27, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

•  Support, but to be fair it was Bencemac who made the list.   — Jeff G. ツ 15:34, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks, corrected. Storkk (talk) 15:38, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

So we appear to have 4 Support, 1 Oppose without valid reason, and 1 comment. I second your move to close.   — Jeff G. ツ 12:39, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

 Support and will help executing - Jcb (talk) 21:28, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@Storkk, Jcb: Thank you for your hard work. Please delete Category:Photos from Magyar Rendőr and its children when empty and use m:Non-free content#Lists of exemption doctrine policies and other information by Wikimedia project as a resource.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

• Since everybody is adding stuff after this discussion is closed, here’s my only question: When are these ready for safe undeletion? In 2060, 2080, when? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 02:39, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Each will be different. If you take the interpretation of "unknown authors" to include the photographers of these images, who were likely magazine staff photographers (this is a position that divides admins, since with some digging it is not unlikely that the identities of the authors might be found), then they would be PD 70 years after publication. These photos range from 1950s to 1980s, so that would imply 2020s to 2050s. If you take the more conservative position, that unknown-to-us does not mean legally unknown, then it appears Hungarian law protects them until 70 years after the death date of the photographer, some of whom are likely still living. Storkk (talk) 12:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

---

Deleted: per nomination and per ticket:2017053010010561. It is unlikely that Fortepan have the legal capacity to license the files. None of these photos is old enough to be PD. I'll be deleting these in tranches. Many may be Fair Use candidates in local wikis that have an EDP that allows for Fair Use photographs. I will notify various parties and wait a full week before deleting those that are in use on wikis that appear to allow fair use. --Storkk (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2017 (UTC)