Commons:Deletion requests/Klingon costumes and props

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.

Klingon costumes and props[edit]

Per my arguments here I believe all of these fail COM:COSTUME. --Daniel Case (talk) 17:28, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Seems worth noting that this proposed deletion of multiple Klingon costume images could end up setting broad reaching precedent affecting hundreds of other costumed images. A question comes to mind ... Are the individuals who made and/or are wearing the costumes seen to be in violation of copyright or are they covered by some sort of fair use (similar to 'parody', perhaps)? If in fact they are not seen to be in violation would not that same fair use carry over to images documenting them?
And COM:COSTUME seems to be a somewhat vague guideline with foggy foundations, in the first place. Perhaps it would be best to let things stand as is, pending any actual DMCA requests (or such) to give indication that anyone at Paramount is really concerned. At present, it seems to me we may be addressing a rationale of 'maybe' based on 'maybe' trying to preempt more 'may be'. i.e. Unless there are established (and upheld) cases of copyright holders objecting to third party images of costumed characters at public events perhaps it would be best to let the images remain. If ever a real tangible complaint is addressed to the wiki, or if some new legal consensus develops to allow relevant clarification of COM:COSTUME, the topic can readily be readdressed then. --Kevjonesin (talk) 22:37, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the guideline COM:COSTUME itself needs considerable review/refinement/clarification/etc. if it is to be used to justify en masse removal of images from Commons. --Kevjonesin (talk) 22:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is almost impossible for me to believe that File:Chonnaq.png raises any copyright issues. It resembles numerous actual (and ancient) weapons. But perhaps you have some specific original that you think it infringes? - Jmabel ! talk 03:42, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Similarly for File:Bat'leth.jpg. - Jmabel ! talk 03:45, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, almost impossible to imagine any issue with File:Uopera.jpg. If it weren't for the assertion that this is a Klingon, at the level of detail visible it could be a samurai. - Jmabel ! talk 03:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I could go on, but COM:COSTUME requires that "[t]he photo would have to be primarily of the mask or other separable [copyrighted] element of the costume, e.g. focusing on the expression inherent in the mask distinct from that of the general character." It's not obvious to me that any of these images meet that criterion, but more to the point: the degree to which that applies clearly varies, and I think it is wrong to lump these. I think it should be incumbent on the nominator to group these and present more of a rationale for each group. Clearly

Daniels cited argument elsewhere does not apply equally to all of these images. - Jmabel ! talk 03:56, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete There is copyright on these pictures and they are rarely valuable educational content.--Kopiersperre (talk) 11:10, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep on the basis of copyright violation, but possibly nominate some for deletion as out of scope. I re-read COM:COSTUME and looked at "kept" examples and they seem much more iffy than the Klingon files nominated here. COM:COSTUME does not address weapons and I could not find any other discussions about potentially copyrighted weapons, other than this DR where there was no discussion. Some images like this does not seem to have much of a costume so the only way we know it is Klingon is because of wrinkled forehead which is likely not something you can copyright. For other images I would follow advice given in Commons:Deletion requests/Images of costumes tagged as copyvios by AnimeFan and use {{Copydesign}}. --Jarekt (talk) 13:32, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Klingon female, USS Eclipse, Second Life.png has the screen behind the character, which is problematic.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:28, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep This is way too broad. Questions about File:Riverside Trek Fest 2014 (14349292930).jpg (pictures of actors in (studio-made?) costumes) are different from File:Bat'leth.jpg (an artist's abstract representation of the bat'leth, and many other images fit in other piles. A blade is a utilitarian item, so anything merely depicting the shape of the blade is fine, though I note a small, probably de minimis Klingon symbol of empire on one of the blades in the photographs. [[:]] has a statue, which means it needs deleted. (FoP-UK does not apply, since it's not permanent.) There's no way to handle everything here in one DR.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:28, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On the issue of copyright and movie props, it would seem that if a prop is a nonfunctional replica of a utilitarian item (such as a nonfunctional replica of a blade that does not have a sharp edge among other things) then the prop might be copyrightable as a model, whereas a prop that is designed to be a functional and non-artistic utilitarian item (such as a blade with a sharp edge that an actor uses to actually cut something) is more likely to be an uncopyrighted utilitarian item. In the case of the Klingon blades in some of the included photos, it appears that the blades have a somewhat artistic shape which blades do not normally have. A while ago, I added an entry on movie props to the Commons image casebook to help, if nothing else, to explore the issue. --Gazebo (talk) 07:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that models are copyrightable because they are idealizations of something. A thing with a blunt edge is the thing, so I wouldn't think that it would get a copyright; there's no copyrightable difference. The artistic shape is harder, but it's not really separable from the blade.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:17, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep, for the most part, in concurrence with:

However, the community has not accepted this strict view, primarily in light of Ets-Hokin v. Skyy Spirits, in which a photograph of a bottle was held not to be derivative of the label on the bottle. Present consensus has adopted the view that in order to be a copyright violation, "[t]he photo would have to be primarily of the mask or other separable element of the costume, e.g. focusing on the expression inherent in the mask distinct from that of the general character."[1] [COM:COSTUME, italics added for emphasis]

... and the links within.

At present I'm unaware of Paramount expressing any explicit concerns about cosplay in general or images thereof on Commons. The 'sky doesn't seem to be falling' as yet and at least some of the images are actively in use in associated wikis. --Kevjonesin (talk) 08:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep for the Bat'leth related images, these are articles of daily use, not artwork.  Delete for the sculpures of course. --Krd 13:39, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: the costumes per discussion. Deleted the images of statues. If someone believes that one of the files I kept is a statue (it is hard to see sometimes) please renominate. There might be problems with the second life image but that needs to be discussed in a new DR since this is to complicate to discuss during a mass DR. Natuur12 (talk) 15:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Klingon_costumes_and_props&oldid=725806208"