Template talk:PD-Iran

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

{{Editprotected}} please use {{Autotranslate}} on this template.−ebraminiotalk 13:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Next time, please prepare the subpages /layout, /en and /lang which do not need sysop rights to be created. Jean-Fred (talk) 19:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
okay, sure. thanks :) −ebraminiotalk 21:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

30[edit]

{{Editprotected}}

"..In the following cases images fall into public domain after 30 from the date of publication.."

- 30 years?--Praveen:talk 03:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done 30 years? and? --Ben.MQ (talk) 21:14, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editprotect[edit]

{{Editprotect}} Please add {{Copyright notes|Country=Iran}} below the template. -- とある白い猫 ちぃ? 01:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

✓ Done Rd232 (talk) 09:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit please[edit]

{{Editprotected}} Please remove {{Copyright notes|Country=Iran}}, there is no consensus about the content of this template. Actually it is paradoxical that the main PD-Iran template follows the copyright terms of Iran, white the next tag doesn't protect the copyright law. Mehran Debate 14:24, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done russavia (talk) 21:12, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

legal person[edit]

{{Editprotected}} legal personality --> legal person.

A work belongs to a person, not a personality. 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The template is correct, see the link to en-wiki. Cheers! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 07:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed the English Wikipedia template. 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:08, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also, look at the following thread. The official translation of the Iranian copyright law reads "the work belongs to a person of legal position." 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:59, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 16:36, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image --> work[edit]

{{Editprotected}}

In the following cases images fall into public domain --> In the following cases works fall into public domain

Here is the official translation of the Iranian copyright law. Look at Article 16.

Article 16. In the following cases, the author's financial rights will be valid for a period of 30 years from the date of publication or public presentation:

  1. Photographic or cinematographic works.
  2. In cases where the work belongs to a person of legal position.

There is no mention to "image" but it mentions to "author".

Now take a look at Article 1.

Article 1. All writers, composers, and artists will hereafter be called "author", and the product of their knowledge, originality or art, irrespective of the method used. therein, will hereafter be called "work"

Author is related to work. 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:53, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Jarekt (talk) 16:36, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PD[edit]

Right now, everything that was published in Iran in 1986 and before is in public domain in USA, Iran and most other countries worldwide! --2607:FB90:8093:34EC:48EB:4E70:3185:CDEA 16:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. Only photographic or cinematographic works, and those that belong to a legal person. 4nn1l2 (talk) 15:33, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The public domain[edit]

{{Editprotected}} into public domain --> into the public domain 4nn1l2 (talk) 08:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done -- User: Perhelion 13:01, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adding |Evidence= parameter[edit]

Hello. Following Special:PermaLink/399982978#PD-Iran and User:Hanooz's suggestion, I have designed a new version of this template. The layout is available at {{PD-Iran/layout/sandbox}}, the English preview at {{PD-Iran/en/sandbox}} and the Persian preview at {{PD-Iran/fa/sandbox}}. This change adds an |evidence= parameter, because this template has been used for no clear reason on many files. This is mostly because we don't have customized templates for PD-Iran (we do have such templates for the US for example). If there is no evidence provided, a category will be added to the file to make the tracking process easier. If there are no opposes, I will apply the change. Ahmadtalk 16:13, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction with COM:CRT/Iran[edit]

In this template, photographic/cinematographic works and works belonging or transferred to a legal person are in the public domain 30 years after the date of publication. But COM:CRT/Iran says only financial rights expire, and thus doesn't limit the copyright holder's right restrict publishing, therefore is not in the public domain. Which one is right really? Pinging 4nn1l2 as they seem to be familiar with Iranian copyright law. pandakekok9 03:38, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pandakekok9: The moral right is perpetual, but I don't think that we respect moral rights here on Commons. I know that the French copyright law has a moral rights section too. If French works fall in the public domain in France, Iranian works can fall in the public domain in Iran too. 4nn1l2 (talk) 06:22, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Having read the law in question, it's not terribly clear, at least in translation out of the context of the rest of Iranian law. It does seem confusing; what does "Author's intellectual rights have no place or time limit and are not transferable." mean?
To quote from https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/ir/ir005en.pdf
Article 3. Author's rights include exclusive right to publish, broadcast, perform and publicize works, and further right to any financial and intellectual profit resulting from his work or name.
Article 4. Author's intellectual rights have no place or time limit and are not transferable.
Article 5. The author of works protected by this law can transfer his financial rights to another party in all cases including the following:
1. Production of films for cinema, television ...
Article 12. The financial rights of the author, the subject of this law, are transferred to his heirs, or by covenant, for a period of thirty years after his death.
Article 19. Any alteration or misquotation followed by publication of a protected work is prohibited, unless it is with the author's permission.
Article 26. In cases where the author's copyright is terminated and the public are freely allowed to use the work in accordance with this law, the Ministry of Culture and Arts, with respect to infringements of articles 17, A, 19, and 20, will act as private plaintive.
So is this "intellectual rights" comparable to French "moral rights"? Article 19 would, by my reading, prohibit colorization of a photograph, for example. I'm not saying we should delete all these works, but we can't really treat them as public domain and not being violating the source nation's copyright law.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:10, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Author's intellectual rights have no place or time limit and are not transferable" is an imitation of the French copyright law "it shall be perpetual, inalienable and imprescriptible" (L121-1).
The Iranian copyright law is really old (as is its English translation). It dates back to 1970. "Intellectual" definitely means moral here as opposed to economic. The actual Persian word (which is of Arabic origin) is معنوی. Translating معنوی to intellectual is bizarre, in my opinion. See also حقوق معنوی and its interwiki links.
Article 19 is a reformulation of right to integrity.
Article 26 is also about the moral rights which are not respected in the wiki world as far as I know. Otherwise, how do French and German works fall in the public domain? 4nn1l2 (talk) 11:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think "intellectual rights" seems basically analogous to moral rights. Colorizing something that was originally black and white can be an issue in the EU as well, but our copyright policy is based on the economic right. Moral rights (and "intellectual rights" here) are a Commons:Non-copyright restriction which can in fact prevent some usages, so people need to be aware of those laws and rights, but should not affect the "free" status as we see it. So "public domain" as a term generally just refers to economic rights (and "financial rights" here). Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:23, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It can be a bit hard to make judgments from a translated law, but I agree with 4nn1l2 -- I read it as though publishing etc. is part of "financial rights". The law was written in 1970, but it seems to me their "financial rights" are basically equivalent to EU's "economic rights", and their "intellectual rights" seem mostly analogous to moral rights. They note that intellectual rights are not transferrable, i.e. they cannot be sold or given up, and they never expire (many EU countries do the same with moral rights). Everything that *is* transferrable would therefore seem to come under "financial rights". Article 5 in particular includes within financial rights (as being transferable) elements which are part of a film, or stage play, the right to broadcast, the right of translation, publication, and public presentation, the use in advertising, and allowing derivative works. All of that seems in line with typical "economic rights". Article 3 does say: Author's rights include exclusive right to publish, broadcast, perform and publicize works, and further right to any financial and intellectual profit resulting from his work or name. But that does not explicitly say that financial rights are separate from the right to publish, etc. -- it just mentions "other financial profit", which is not the same thing. If they were separate, then technically no term for those other rights is prescribed in the law, because there are only terms for financial rights. If the text in this page which distinguishes financial rights from publishing is based on that clause, then I think it's mistaken.
I do have some trouble trying to distinguish Article 15 (where rights of an employer revert after 30 years to the human author for the remainder of the 30pma term), and Article 16(2) (where all rights end at 30 years from publication). Maybe "belongs" in Article 16(2) refers to a physical object (like a building or a sculpture), rather than referring to the ownership of the copyright itself. Again, these may be more clear in the original language. Carl Lindberg (talk) 16:17, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Clindberg: Article 13 reads The financial right of work produced by employees belongs to the employer for a period of thirty years from the date of production, unless a shorter period or more limited arrangements has been agreed upon [emphasis mine] and Article 14 reads A person to whom the rights of the author have been transferred, is entitled to hold same for a period of 30 years, unless a shorter period is agreed upon [emphasis mine]. Then Article 15 states With respect to articles 13 and 14 of this law, on the expiry of the agreed period of time, ownership of rights will be restored to the author, or otherwise settled according to Article 12 above. It means that if employer A employs employee B to create an artwork and according to their contact, all rights belong to the employer A for only 20 years, the employee B can enjoy the remaining 10-year period of the term of protection (30 years in total). The word belong in Article 16 does not refer to the materials, but the copyright itself. That is why we keep images of Azadi Tower (a governmental work) while its architect, Hossein Amanat, is still alive. 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I may have misread that a bit initially. (And yes, I did argue for keeping photos of the Azadi Tower either way, based on Article 16.) Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:00, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that my note probably misinterpreted the breadth of "financial rights". I have modified it accordingly. I am limited by the fact that I am working with the translation of the law, so feel free to make further changes if you think it wise. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:05, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-old-warning-text applies here?[edit]

I was satisfied by this edit by @Chubit: , this means that for some reasons Iranian public domain works have possible to be copyrighted in the United States, which I'm afraid this isn't really true, as Iran didn't participant Berne Convention and, as a country always got economical and political sanctions from US, they even can't join WTO or UCC. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Continued at COM:VPC#Iran and URAA. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:48, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The U.S. would protect unpublished Iranian works, but that's about it. There are no URAA considerations or any other U.S. tag needed for published Iranian works, since there are no copyright relations. Commons policy is to respect the terms that Iran's own law has (i.e. treat them as "country of origin" for works first published there even though that is a technically a term from the Berne Convention). If Iran ever does join the Berne Convention or WTO, that will change -- but if we have kept to only works which are PD in Iran, and Iran does not retroactively restore its own works (which is the more likely scenario), then all the works we have previously uploaded will continue to be OK since they would have expired before the URAA date. So, PD-Iran alone is generally also enough for the U.S. If an Iranian author first publishes a work in another country though, then that country is the "country of origin". Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]