Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alexander City Tornado Emergency in 2023.jpg
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.
- File:Radar of the Alexander City tornado emergency.jpg added following UNDEL request by King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:50, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Nonsense PD rationale--see also here. This is a screenshot of RadarOmega software. That the radar station using the software is operated by the US federal government does not magically make the graphical output of non-government software free. The premise here is tantamount to saying a screenshot of a federal employee's Windows 10 desktop would be PD-USGov. Эlcobbola talk 19:07, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- What is the logic here for this deletion reason? The data DOES fall under public domain. Would you say any public domain image listed on Wikipedia would be in violation of copyright because Wikipedia isn't a copyright free website? No. Same idea here. You use an application like RadarOmega, GR2Analyst, GR3Analyst, etc... to access that radar data. There have been multiple instances of the US Government even tweeting images from some of these applications. Are those in violation of copyright then? No. Radar screenshots have been used in dozens (probably hundreds) of articles. I already am challenging a previous deletion on a similar file and this is making it more difficult. A good example is this NWS Des Moines tweet. They used GR2Analyst to create those images. DO those fall under public domain? If no, then all NOAA-related screenshots do not fall under public domain. If yes, then NEXRAD radar data falls under public domain. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- One of the greatest examples is this tweet by NWS Tampa Bay[1]. Publically using RadarScope. Does that fall under public domain? Yes: This clearly falls under public domain. No: Then the policy that all things by the US Government fall under public domain is incorrect and should be altered. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:23, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- The logic is presented in the rationale and the linked UDR discussion, which, like {{PD-USGov}}, you appear not to have read. {{PD-USGov}} applies to “work[s] of the United States Government” (17 U.S.C. § 105) which are "work[s] prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties." (17 U.S.C. § 101). RadarOmega software was not prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties. A government employee posting screenshots therefrom has no bearing on its copyright. "[A]ll things by the US Government fall under public domain" is not a policy and the rest of this w:WP:OTHERSTUFF is of no relevance. Эlcobbola talk 19:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Keep The data is clearly PD. While the software which was used to present it is copyrighted, the only human involvement is by the uploader, who put a CC-0 license on the second image and should do the same on the first one. It is well established the output of a computer does not itself have a copyright unless it is derived from a copyrighted work. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)- Keep Idem Pierre cb (talk) 19:38, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion, in particular per Jim. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
