Wikisource:Copyright discussions

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days. For the archive overview, see /Archives.Template:Autoarchive resolved section/parameter timecompare set to 'resolved'

Index:Raggle-Taggle 1933.djvu

Per c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Raggle-Taggle (Starkie, 1933). I suggest the uploader pauses and does a little checking of previous uploads. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:49, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

ShakespeareFan00: Absolutely check my other uploads!--RaboKarbakian (talk) 11:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

File:Mallory v. Norfolk Southern page 19 image.jpg

The deletion rationale at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mallory v. Norfolk Southern page 19 image.jpg still seems valid to me (I think). If that's so, then the license is wrong - it's not a public domain work of the US government, it's an all-rights-reserved image by Norfolk Southern Corporation (it even says so at the bottom!) - which means that we can't host this image at all. Duckmather (talk) 23:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

• Duckmather: As this is a copyright issue, I have moved it to our copyright discussion board and changed the template. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:31, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. Commons has determined (in a lengthy discussion with dozens of participants) that such images are allowed. This discussion (with only one comment besides my own) is not sufficient to change Commons consensus on that issue. In addition, this image (and many like it) are also considered acceptable here. Just as I explained in the deletion discussion on Commons, by being included within a Supreme Court opinion it becomes a part of the opinion, and is thus in the public domain. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 23:36, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Constitutions of Syria (1953) and (1973)

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived:

Deleted, public domain status not proven.

Constitution of Syria (1953) and Constitution of Syria (1973)'s originals were surely {{PD-EdictGov}}, but we have no translator information, and as english isn't one of the country's official languages, it seems unlikely to me that the constitution's source would be in english. The Middle East Journal, the source for (53) is marked © 1953 Middle East Institute, and does not indicate any translation information. (73) is published on UNHCR site, with a disclaimer on it that says Disclaimer: This is not a UNHCR publication, and as such is probably not eligible for {{PD-UN}}. Does someone know why this would be PD? — Alien  3
3 3 06:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

 This section is considered resolved, for the purposes of archiving. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:52, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Contemporarily published Lovecraft poems

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived:

Deleted, public domain status not proven.

I’ve been going through Lovecraft’s works which are held here and scan-backing them; so far, I have added his writings from two major amateur periodicals, and will be working on and off on works published in other obscure, scattered issues. I have also been looking through his Author: page, and have made the following list (only of poems, so far) of works which were published in modern, copyrighted collections.

• Arcadia (Lovecraft)
• Dead Passion's Flame
• On the Creation of Niggers
• The Poem of Ulysses, or The Odyssey
• Tosh Bosh
• Waste Paper

The index for the third poem should be deleted, as well; it is a manuscript, which was not published (and not even clearly Lovecraft’s, but that’s besides the point). TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:10, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Note that the copyvio template should be added after the header, not before.

Do you have details of where these were first published ? -- Beardo (talk) 04:32, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

• Beardo: That has never been the practice, so far as I am aware; the template blocks out the entire page, because it is placed at the very top. As for the original source, “Tosh Bosh” and “Waste Paper” were first published in A Winter Wish, and the others in The Ancient Track. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:50, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

  You need to keep the header so that people know what the work is (and who wrote it). The template page says "Add the template to the top of the work after the completion of {{header}}". Whilst not particularly clear, what else can that mean ? -- Beardo (talk) 04:57, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

So, what exactly is "On the Creation of Niggers"—something I ask because with over 2,000 page views per month, it is literally one of the most viewed works on the entire site? Was it a poem genuinely written by Lovecraft, or is there some confusion about this? If it was actually by him and was indeed written in 1912, it may be keepable as an unpublished work, since Lovecraft died in 1938, and the manuscript clearly credited him, didn't it? So that would mean it wasn't anonymous or pseudonymous, which means that as an unpublished work it would follow the 70-year-PMA rule (apparently). If the poem is legitimate, in WS:PD terms it can be kept IMO since, though it was a rather bizarre work, it was the output of a clearly notable author.

By the way, Wikipedia says on this matter that "in this period [Lovecraft] also wrote racist poetry, including "New-England Fallen" and "On the Creation of Niggers", but there is no indication that either were published during his lifetime." and cites "Joshi 2010a, p. 138; de Camp 1975, p. 95." as its reference for that statement. SnowyCinema (talk) 06:11, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

There's that source, and it seems that nobody familiar with the subject actually claims it's not his. There's a mimeographed copy, which implies to me that he did distribute freely without notice.--Prosfilaes (talk) 08:23, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

• SnowyCinema: It is only attributed to him, which is why the attribution is usually upheld; but there is no external evidence indicating that it is his poem. (Incidentally, “New England Fallen” is in the public domain.) The cut-off date for unpublished works was 2003 (according to the Hirtle chart), and The Ancient Track was first published in 2001, so that poem is indeed copyrighted. Wikipedia is certainly correct in saying that neither were published during his lifetime; “New England Fallen” was first seen in Beyond the Wall of Sleep, a 1943 collection (with issues on the renewal end which let a few works enter the public domain), while The Ancient Track has no such copyright issues. Prosfilaes: I don’t think that’s true: only one copy is known to exist, which may not even have been made by Lovecraft, and none of his extant letters reference the poem at all. The mimeographed copy was likely made by someone else, even if Lovecraft did write the poem. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 13:13, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

  The source of that document - https://repository.library.brown.edu/studio/item/bdr:425397/ - does say "no copyright" - but with no indication of the reason for that statement. -- Beardo (talk) 17:55, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

  • Beardo: That same claim is made on all of their manuscripts of his works not published in his lifetime; for instance, this poem, not published until the Selected Letters of the 1970s (and certainly copyrighted thereby), is marked as being without copyright in the same manner. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 18:50, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

@TE(æ)A,ea.: Ah! I forgot about the 2003 thing. So, then,  Delete all six poems, until evidence of public-domain status for any one of them surfaces. SnowyCinema (talk) 20:43, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

• SnowyCinema: I fixed your Wiki-link above to go to his Wikipedia article (and not his Author: page here). Also, did you mean six poems or only five—I nominated six. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:02, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I miscounted, thanks! SnowyCinema (talk) 21:04, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

 This section is considered resolved, for the purposes of archiving. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 10:03, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Constitution of Syria (2025)

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived:

Deleted, public domain status not proven.

The English translation comes from https://constitutionnet.org/. There is no trace of the work being released into PD or under a free licence and also the site's tems of use are not really favourable. -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 11:43, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

 This section is considered resolved, for the purposes of archiving. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 08:55, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Copyright Act (South Korea, 2004), etc.

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived:

Deleted, public domain status not proven.

• Copyright Act (South Korea, 2004) [1]
• Copyright Act (South Korea, 2006) [2] (The Korea Copyright Commission is credited as the source. No archived page is available. Currnet page provides the version translated by KLRI. I believe that we cannot use {{PD-EdictGov}} for the translations done by the Korea Copyright Commission.)
• Act on Anti-Corruption and the Establishment and Operation of the Anti-Corruption & Civil Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea [3]
• Basic Employment Policy Act of the Republic of Korea [4]
• Biotechnology Support Act of the Republic of Korea [5]
• Computer Programs Protection Act [6]
• Translation:Commercial Act of South Korea [7]
• Foreign Exchange Transaction Act of the Republic of Korea [8]
• Foreigner's Land Acquisition Act [9]
• Government Organization Act of South Korea [10]
• Immigration Control Act of South Korea [11]
• National Security Act (South Korea, 2016) [12]
• Patent Act of South Korea [13]
• Patent Act of South Korea [14]
• Special Act on The May 18 Democratization Movement, etc. [15]
• Trademark Act of South Korea [16]
• Civil Act of South Korea [17]

Please refer to the previous discussion. If text is translated by Korea Legislation Research Institute (KLRI), it is copyrighted in both South Korea and the United States. Translations available on law.go.kr (or moj.go.kr, previously known as moleg.go.kr) are also translated by KLRI. --Namoroka (talk) 12:11, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

 This section is considered resolved, for the purposes of archiving. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 09:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Presidential Proclamation of Sovereignty over Adjacent Seas

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived:

Deleted, public domain status not proven.

This is the letter (or just "proclamation") written by Syngman Rhee, not the law. I don't think this work falls under 'constitution, laws, treaties, decrees, ordinances and rules.' So cannot use {{PD-KRGov}}. Original Korean text is also not in PD by 2035 since author died in 1965. Translation is also released in CC BY-NC-ND or KOGL BY-NC-ND. Archived link --Namoroka (talk) 12:11, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

 This section is considered resolved, for the purposes of archiving. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 11:07, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Constitution of Andorra

English translation copyrighted according to https://oxcon.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:ocw/law-ocw-cd916.regGroup.1/law-ocw-cd916?rskey=OTzZjw&result=832&prd=OCW&print -- Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Kassaman

The national anthem of Algeria. The lyrics were written in 1955 by Mufdi Zakariah, who died in 1977. Contrary to popular belief, national anthems are not necessarily in the public domain, either in their home country nor in the US.

According to commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Algeria, the copyright would have expired in Algeria in 2002 (1977+25). If I understand correctly, this would have made it copyrighted in the US under URAA until 2027. Furthermore, according to this article, Zakariah's heirs transferred the copyright for Kassaman to the Algerian government in 2017. This, I believe, is sufficient evidence that there is no exemption for Kassaman in Algerian copyright law. And since a national anthem is not an edict of government, there is no exemption in US law either.

And finally there is the matter of translation. The English translation appears to be based on the translation in National Anthems of the World (1960), which is still under copyright. The text has been revised since then, but not fully rewritten, so IMO the translation we have is still copyvio. —Beleg Âlt ^BT (talk) 20:09, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Dear Motherland

Specifically the translation. The same translation appears in Encyclopedia of National Anthems (2003), which credits the source as this defunct website. There is no copy of this page in the Wayback Machine, so I believe we must consider this to probably be copyvio. —Beleg Âlt ^BT (talk) 20:29, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Children Prayer

This translation is copied from something that very likely copied it from Wikipedia. At any rate, the translation is not attributed to a PD source, and I haven't managed to find one for it. — Alien  3
3 3 16:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's farewell speech to the United Nations Security Council

Claims to be {{PD-UN}}, however I could not find any UN-published, official, record of it, or containing it. I'm not sure that having been said at the UN makes it public domain. Note: when this gets deleted, also delete Author:Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, as having no works in scope. — Alien  3
3 3 16:53, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

About the author, I would have thought that there should be works in scope - though not listed on that page. Also, should that page have all those detailed descriptions of the books ? (Which I guess are under copyright anyway.) -- Beardo (talk) 19:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

The record is hosted here: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/586026 paragraphs 58-84. MarkLSteadman (talk) 19:38, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Ah, good, thanks for finding that. I need to get better at finding stuff. — Alien  3
3 3 13:13, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

There are several copies of a film of the speech - or perhaps several links to the same copy. I haven't watched to see if they are complete. And the official report does not include the (Ripping papers) at the end. The only texts that I can see with that are drawn from our version. -- Beardo (talk) 14:00, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Cusco Declaration

As pointed out by User:Beardo on the talk page of this work, the translation source is still unidentified. This English version should be assumed under copyright until a source is found that proves otherwise. SnowyCinema (talk) 12:45, 30 March 2025 (UTC)