Commons:Deletion requests/File:Schermafdruk treinpad test ECD naar Brussel.jpg
Own work? 217.213.30.242 06:11, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
- The only (own) work is taking a screenshot. No different than scanning a document. The screen information is software generated on query demand, no human creative content. There is no compagny logo.Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
- Ps: I did start a Dutch discussion in Schermafdruk, but got no reaction.Smiley.toerist (talk) 09:40, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
- I cropped the bottom part, as not usefull.Smiley.toerist (talk) 10:02, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
- Eventually
Keep with caveats. Per COM:Android, the icons are to be deemed problematic, especially detailed graphics like the train symbol. So, any image containing them has to get a crop and be revision deleted. The pure train travel data should be OK per {{PD-text}}, but then, we may have a problem with our scope. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 00:09, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
- Scope is no problem. In the English description is explained why this train is special.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:06, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Grand-Duc: are you saying that the train icon differs sufficiently from File:Sprinter San Diego.png to constitute a different issue, or that German law on TOO is different enough from U.S. law to make this a different matter, or that File:Sprinter San Diego.png is a copyvio? Because clearly one of the three has to be the case.
- For the record, I believe this particular icon is too simple to copyright. - Jmabel ! talk 17:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- German law is rather irrelevant in this case, as the country of origin would be the Netherlands. But I actually only read our pages about COM:Screenshots and Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Trademarks before writing my comment above. I got the opinion, which also gets confirmed at least by COM:TOO US (COM:TOO Netherlands seems to be more permissive) that the icons are a borderline case for getting copyright protection. I would not dare to predict a court case outcome about the San Diego train graphic, especially not when compared to some examples in the "Not OK" section in the US TOO page (the Android robot, the Twitter bird, the Omega balloon). Wouldn't that be a textbook case for applying COM:PRP? Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- Found this via the Village Pump: I would say that the full ensemble of layout+design is copyrightable, and probably is. The information contained in the screenshot is not protected (the full database behind it, or larger excerpt of it, would however be under limited protection under general EU-Copylaws, but for much shorter time than the design itsself).
- With regards to Jmabels example of the San Diego graphic, that is "just" a single icon instead of a full arrangement. However, it's apparently not a generic train icon like many others in Category:Train icons. So if the front of the trains looks exactly like the graphic, it might also be protected. --10:09, 21 March 2025 (UTC) Enyavar (talk) 10:09, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
- German law is rather irrelevant in this case, as the country of origin would be the Netherlands. But I actually only read our pages about COM:Screenshots and Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Trademarks before writing my comment above. I got the opinion, which also gets confirmed at least by COM:TOO US (COM:TOO Netherlands seems to be more permissive) that the icons are a borderline case for getting copyright protection. I would not dare to predict a court case outcome about the San Diego train graphic, especially not when compared to some examples in the "Not OK" section in the US TOO page (the Android robot, the Twitter bird, the Omega balloon). Wouldn't that be a textbook case for applying COM:PRP? Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
