Commons:Deletion requests/Aalto vases

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion debate 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.

Aalto vases[edit]

According to Finnish copyright laws, "works [of art]" are protected by coypright 70 years after the creator's death. This covers also industrial art, if the piece in question can be described as a product of originality and artistic vision, and it can be argued that no one other would have designed the piece in the same way. The designer of these vases (most often called Aalto vases or Savoy vases), Alvar Aalto, died in 1976, and his works enter PD in 2047. Pitke (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per COM:DW#Isn't every product_copyrighted_by_someone? What about cars? Or kitchen chairs? My computer case?. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:20, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That is the US copyright law, not the Finnish. Pitke (talk) 15:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide some Finnish case law or opinions by the Finnish copyright council to support your position that these photos should be deleted here. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:47, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Informal translation of the Finnish copyright law, chapter 1, section 1: "Subject and content of the copyright law": A person who has creates a literal or an artistic work, holds the copyright for that work, be it fine literature or descriptive presentation in written or spoken form, musical composition or work of dramatic art, cinematic work, photographic work or any other work of visual art, architectural work, work of industrial art or handiwork art or expressed in other ways. (24.3.1995/446)" Pitke (talk) 15:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Trying to get opinions. Pitke (talk) 15:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some case laws and quotes from reports: Tekijänoikeusneuvoston lausunto 1997:4 (Statement 19897:4 by the Finnish Copyright council): "Industrial Designer A has requested the Copyright council for a statement regarding the copyright of the "Fyr" lamp designed by them" (...) "The Copyright council firstly states that (...) the request for statement is regarding whether the discussed lamp is within the "work scope" or not" (...) "To be covered by copyright, a product must be within the so-called "work scope". That is, the work must be a unique and original creative product. A product is deemed to be within the "work scope" when it is unique and original enough that no other person than the creator could normally be expected to create an equal product. The literary or artistic level of the product does not affect whether a product should be covered by copyright, nor does the amount of labour or knowledge required for producing the product. (...)"
"(...) that the proposed law would not cover every product that can, by a person of no especial education, be called an artistic utility article. A product of industrial art or handicraft art is covered by copyright on the condition that it can be regarded an artistic piece. (...)" Komiteanmietintö 1953:5, page 45)
"Concerning products of industrial art and handicraft art, or so-called utility art", the threshold of the "work scope" has in practice been settled relatively high. (...)"
"Deciding whether a given product is within the "work scope" depends on considering the circumstances, however it is imperative that the product be new and original." (Komiteanmietintö 1953:5: Ehdotus laiksi tekijänoikeudesta kirjallisiin ja taiteellisiin teoksiin, page. 44)
"(...) That a product has a practical use does not affect whether or not it is within the "work scope". However, if the purpose of the product dominates over the final outcome of the creation process rather than the creator's artistic visions, the product is not considered unique and original enough to be covered by copyright." (from a report considering candlesticks, page 5)
I'm also contacting the council, but getting a report might well take six months. Hopefully they'll deal with this quickly... Pitke (talk) 19:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The report has been now given, and it explicitly states the Aalto vase is copyrighted as a work of art. The report is in Finnish, but I can quote/scan and ask fellow Finns to confirm this. Pitke (talk) 15:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes: "Abstract: The Aalto vase is a work of art as defined in §1 of [Finnish] copyright law."
"Plea [by Iittala Oy]: (...) Iittala finds that the wave-like shape of the vase is not dictated by the intended use of the product, but clearly expresses artistic effort from the part of the creator. According to Iittala's view, no other person could have designed a vase of equivalent properties."
"Statement by the copyright council: (...) According to the council's view, however, the wave-like shapes of the two original Aalto vases are not dictated by the intended use of the item, but by the artistic effort by their creator. Thus the council finds the two original Aalto vases original and individual enough that they should be considered works of art as defined by §1 by the [Finnish] copyright law." "The copyright of these works of art does not only include completely identical copies, but extends more widely. The vases presented by the applicant [that's me] all are versions of the original Aalto vases. They resemble the original Aalto vases to invoke a feeling of sameness in a viewer." Pitke (talk) 15:37, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And the links I provided for pictures as requested by the council (Savoy vase being the original name of the Aalto vase): Wikimedia Commons -tietokannassa olevia kuvia Savoy-maljakosta: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aalto-malja.JPG - Iittalan sarjatyönä valmistama pienoisversio (?) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alvar_Aalto_tvar.jpg - korkea versio (mahdollinen jäljitelmä) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alvar_Aalto_vases_from_late_30%C2%B4s.jpg - 30-luvun kappaleita, ns. "klassiset" Savoy-maljakon mittasuhteet (mahdollisesti alkuperäissarjaa; ensijulkaisu oli vuonna 1937). Sekä http://www.designcentershop.com/catalog/images/Aalto_160_sand_shop.jpg - Iittalan sarjatyönä valmistama versio Pitke (talk) 15:37, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Pictures of the Savoy vase as found in the Wikimedia Commons: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aalto-malja.JPG - a mass produced miniature version by Iittala (?), http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alvar_Aalto_tvar.jpg - a high version (a possible imitation piece), http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alvar_Aalto_vases_from_late_30%C2%B4s.jpg - pieces from the 1930s, so-called "classical" proportions of the Savoy vase (might belong to the original series; the vase was first presented in 1937) - and http://www.designcentershop.com/catalog/images/Aalto_160_sand_shop.jpg - a mass produced version by Iittala." Pitke (talk) 15:37, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Delete (a shame, since they're pretty) with thanks to Pitke for the research and followup. ++Lar: t/c 18:08, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The copyright council does not say that the photos are infringements. As far as I understand, they only say that copies and imatations are infringements. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't that common sense I ask? These photos are of 3D pieces of art protected by copyright. The photo rights have been released, but because the vases are there, and the vases aren't free game, the photos can't be stored in Commons. Please don't ask me to file another request and make the council hold another full-fledged sitting for this. Pitke (talk) 19:17, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is not my fault that you failed to ask the most relevant question. The copyright council seems to feel that the protection of this kind of utilitarian designs is limited, when it says: "The copyright of these works of art does not only include completely identical copies, but extends more widely. " They did not state that "more widely" includes to prohibition of publishing photos of these vases without permission by the Aalto estate. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:39, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
COM:DW. See also File:Derivative Works Decision Tree.svg for a nifty decision chart. Pitke (talk) 20:10, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let's run that. It's accepted practice here for deciding.
  • "3D object?" Check. On to "PD by age" to see if it's old enough
  • "PD by age?" Nope. On to "Threshold of originality" to see if it's original enough
  • "Threshold of Originality met?" Yes... see the above information provided by Pitke, under Finnish law it has been. So... on to "permanently installed in public"
  • "Permanently installed in a public place?" Nope. Creator's permission is required
  • "Creator's permission obtained?" Nope.
  • ===>> DO NOT UPLOAD. ( == in this case ==) "delete" since it's uploaded already.
QED. ++Lar: t/c 21:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Thanks to Pitke for doing all this work. And as Lar so nicely displayed in the last edit => deleted. Cecil (talk) 03:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]