Property talk:P6216

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Documentation

copyright status
copyright status for intellectual creations like works of art, publications, software, etc.
Descriptioncopyright status for any work of art or intellectual creation
Representscopyright status (Q50424085)
Associated item
Data typeItem
Domainwork (Q386724) and data (Q42848)
Allowed valuespublic domain (Q19652), copyrighted (Q50423863), not yet determined (Q59496158) and unknown (Q24238356)
ExampleAtomic Cloud Rises Over Nagasaki (Q55437339)public domain (Q19652)
One Thousand and One Nights (Q8258)public domain (Q19652)
Guernica (Q175036)copyrighted (Q50423863)
Mona Lisa (Q12418)public domain (Q19652)
Gutenberg Bible (Q158075)public domain (Q19652)
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (Q102438)copyrighted (Q50423863)
See alsolicense (P275), public domain date (P3893), copyright owner (P3931)
Lists
Proposal discussionProperty proposal/copyright status
Current uses96
Search for values
Explanations [Edit] Documentation of copyright status (P6216) can be found at Help:Copyrights.
One of public domain (Q19652), copyrighted (Q50423863), not yet determined (Q59496158), unknown (Q24238356): value must be one of the specified items. Please expand list if needed. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P6216#One of, values statistics, search, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
Type “work (Q386724), data (Q42848): element must contain property “instance of (P31)” with classes “work (Q386724), data (Q42848)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P6216#Type Q386724, Q42848, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
Qualifiers “applies to jurisdiction (P1001), start time (P580), end time (P582), license (P275), applies to part (P518), copyright owner (P3931), author (P50), creator (P170), determination method (P459), statement disputed by (P1310), statement supported by (P3680), public domain date (P3893), sourcing circumstances (P1480), publication date (P577), laws applied (P3014): this property should be used only with the listed qualifiers. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P6216#Allowed qualifiers, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)

not yet determined / Q59496158 as a value[edit]

Dominic, did you plan for this to be an allowed value, an exception, or just something for us to use through which to keep track? James F. (talk) 18:12, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done in [1], thanks Jarekt! James F. (talk) 19:06, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

data as an allowed domain?[edit]

In [2], Jarekt added data as an allowed domain. This feels quite wrong to me; copyright doesn't attach to non-creative works [yes yes, sweat of the brow] – that would be database rights, Q688416. James F. (talk) 19:05, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

James F. I was trying to align this property with constraints used by license (P275) property. I guess we could search the use of license (P275) where item is an instance of data (Q42848) but not work (Q386724) and see if they make sense. I just would like to change both of them at the same time. --Jarekt (talk) 19:10, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
@Jarekt: Ah, right. That makes sense. Thanks! James F. (talk) 19:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
This property is not exclusively for copyrightable works, since it takes "public domain" as a possible value. I supposed there are cases where it may be relevant to note the copyright status of non-creative works, and we should allow it, though I'm not sure where that slippery slope ends (you also can't copyright sadness (Q169251), but that's probably not worth saying). Dominic (talk) 01:01, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
I agree that this property is for any type of work that might be copyrightable and even some that are not. We do have images which are in Public domain using Template:PD-ineligible (Q5881610), for example some simple text logos, signatures or x-ray images. I assume this property will be used on Wikidata for artworks and on Commons for images. --Jarekt (talk) 03:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
@Dominic: I'd say that the "copyright status" of something is only meaningful with regard to something that could have a copyright attached to it. For example, creative photographs are copyrightable, and yet creative photographs taken in the course of their duties by agents of the US Federal Government are public domain because of the operation of the relevant law, not because they're magically not creative photographs. Having items that could not under any circumstances tagged with this property – be they datasets, emotions, or whatever – adds confusion. Having parallel properties for patents, design rights, database rights etc. could be a useful extension, but we shouldn't muddy this property by trying to overload it to mean "intellectual property concerns". James F. (talk) 18:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

copyright status justification[edit]

Moved from Wikidata:Property proposal/copyright status: Do we have somebody prepared to create a proposal for copyright status justification? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:01, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

@ArthurPSmith: We already have and use determination method (P459) for that, for example 70 years pma (Q29870196) and 100 years pma (Q29940705). Doesn't that cover it? Multichill (talk) 23:15, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
But the status and justification can vary by country. No examples have been offered demonstrating the use of this property for a less than trivial case. For example: The Secret Adversary (Q617379) is a slightly more complicated case. The novel is PD in the United States, since it was published prior to 1922, but under copyright in the UK, because Agatha Christie died less than 70 years ago. The copyright status in other countries may vary. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:51, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Multichill, I forgot about that property as we always used word justification in describing it, but you are correct it is very close. determination method (P459) is quite natural fit for PD works, but I was hoping to use the same method for copyrighted works like my photos on Commons once we have Structured data. Would it work to have determination method (P459) = Template:Own (Q14401683) or some equivalent item? --Jarekt (talk) 03:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Besides determination method (P459) we use applies to jurisdiction (P1001) to declare the public domain date (P3893) if it differs per country (see examples), we can do the same for copyright status (P6216) --Hannolans (talk) 13:16, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Maybe figure out the public domain case first before we switch to the next case? We might end up being able to use the existing property or creating a new one.
For some interesting edge cases related to this have a look at Het achterhuis (Q14624856) and Truncated View of the Broekzijder Mill on the Gein Wings Facing West (Q19883472). But before we dive into the edge case, let's get agree on how to do some easy ones? Than we have a starting point to figure out the harder cases. Let's take Day of the God (Mahana no Atua) (Q3765980) as an example. I noticed my bot just uploaded a new image for it. I added public domain to it, but what qualifiers should be added? Multichill (talk) 13:29, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
It's a bit difficult to find what all the possible justifications (or determination methods) for copyright status would be. In an ideal world, maybe we need to first create an item for "copyright status justification" so that we can collect all the possible values by adding "instance of":"copyright status justification" to them and have a queryable list from that. This list would also be helpful for a help manual. Dominic (talk) 17:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey: Does applies to jurisdiction (P1001) satisfy your concerns about jurisdiction issues, or is it more complicated than that? I can't think of a case where simply adding multiple values with different jurisdiction qualifiers wouldn't be appropriate, but I just want to be clear we are understanding your concern. Dominic (talk) 17:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
I don't know. I am simply seeking model exemplars that would address such situations. We need exemplars of correct property use for more complex cases so that editors will have a model to follow. The current exemplars for this property are trivially simple. If you can set up one or more exemplars for more complex cases, then we have something as a basis for discussion. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:13, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
As a start, what do people think of https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q617379#P6216 as a start? (Needs references, and we'd need to tag Q47246828 to make determination method happy somehow). James F. (talk) 18:58, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
How would we add additional jurisdictions, such as Canada, India, or the EU? --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:33, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
I created Countries with 70 years pma (Q59542795) and used it at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q617379#P6216 . Countries with 70 years pma (Q59542795) contains partial list of countries based on list of countries' copyright length (Q3041655). We could also add info that it is also copyrighted in Countries with 50 years pma, but that might be an overkill. --Jarekt (talk) 04:59, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Why would that be overkill? Some books will be copyright for both 50 and 70, but at some point they'll be PD for 50 and copyright for 70. And what about countries which have other timespans? --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:04, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
On Commons we only worry about copyright in country of origin and in the US (where the servers are). We could list copyright situation for every group of countries with different pma, but that seems to me as not necessary. --Jarekt (talk) 05:11, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
BTW I also have example #2 Day of the God (Mahana no Atua) (Q3765980). Thoughts? --Jarekt (talk) 05:13, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Wikidata is not limited to the needs of Commons; it serves all MW projects and more. We have contributors from all over the world, including people who need to know whether a work is under copyright in their country, not just the US and the work's country of origin.
Consider Pygmalion (Q637200), a play which is under copyright in the EU and UK because Shaw (the author) died in 1950 (less than 70 yrs pma), but is in PD for the US because it was published prior to 1923, and in Canada because copyright there is 50 yrs pma. How do we label the copyright status of this play when different jurisdictions have the same copyright status but differing reasons for that status? --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:18, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
EncycloPetey Commons also serves all MW projects and more, we just prioritize country of origin and US. I am OK with people adding statements covering many different countries, although I think we should group them as much as possible. To label the copyright status of this play when different jurisdictions have the same copyright status but differing reasons, I would just add additional P6216=PD with different reason and different countries. --Jarekt (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Can you please demonstrate what this would look like? --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:18, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
I created items like Countries with 50 years pma (Q59621182) and Countries with 70 years pma (Q59542795) to group many countries with similar copyright laws into a single item. I used them in Het achterhuis (Q14624856) for both PD and copyrighted cases. --Jarekt (talk) 05:58, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Mass add this property to old paintings?[edit]

We currently have about 330.000 paintings here on Wikidata. A simple query for all the paintings that are made before 1800 or for which the painter died before 1900 returns 120.000 paintings. Should we mass add the public domain copyright status to these works? Should be a good way to kick start this property. Multichill (talk) 23:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

May be we should first write Help:Copyrights with examples of how to use this, and add them to a few items so we can see we are all on the same page. Than I think doing it for majority of artworks would be a great start. --Jarekt (talk) 03:52, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Multichill So how would such entry look like for those 120k paintings? I was thinking:
copyright status
Normal rank public domain Arbcom ru editing.svg edit
applies to jurisdiction worldwide
determination method 100 years pma
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference
+ add value
Is the determination method=100 years pma sufficient? Or should we have some other item? --Jarekt (talk) 19:41, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Model Item[edit]

Do we have a Model Item for this property? I'd love to see a nice juicy and complex copyright story with different jurisdictions, editions, competing perspectives and dates... something we can use to really express the flexibility of this property. Perhaps Diary of Anne Frank (Q6911) would be a good one - see the en.wp description of it's copyright history at The Diary of a Young Girl # Copyright and ownership of the originals. Wittylama (talk) 13:19, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Liam, copyright of Diary of Anne Frank (Q6911) which include several editions, seem to be a mess. Original Manuscripts by Anne Frank (Q29571913) seem to be only written by Anne Frank, it is in Public Domain and we can document various copyright owners. Het achterhuis (Q14624856) (1947 version) has more messy copyright history, it seems like it is in Public Domain since 2016, however Anne Frank Fund (Q565286), the last copyright owner, now claims that the book was co-authored by Otto Frank and they still hold the copyrights, so we can try to model disputed claims. Other versions would have translator copyrights and copyrights by later editors, like 1986 version: De dagboeken van Anne Frank (Q29562896). So copyright of Diary of Anne Frank (Q6911) which include many editions might be too messy to tackle, but manuscripts by Anne Frank (Q29571913) and Het achterhuis (Q14624856) would be OK. --Jarekt (talk) 19:17, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
it looks like you've done an excellent job on Het achterhuis (Q14624856) now already Jarekt, building on the work of Hannolans. I propose it should be listed as Model Item for that property's usage! How do we make that statement? Wittylama (talk) 11:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
The copyright of the works of Anne Frank is a debate, due to rules for unpublished versus published works and postuum works. We need to take in account the publication date besides the creation date as the original publication didnt include all the manuscripts as some texts of the manuscrpts where published in 1986 and thus have other copyright rules. What we can do is add qualifiers for the part of work that was published versus unpublished and have multiple copyright statuses if needed. If we are able to do so we have a perfect example that we even can even handle complex copyright situations --Hannolans (talk) 11:45, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
No, we do not have model items. See the discussion above (in #copyright status justification) where we determined that only the very simplest situations could be handled with the current setup. A new proposal has been started (see below at #Rights statements). --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:13, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Liam, I added copyright statements to Het achterhuis (Q14624856). One can make it much more complicated by also modeling copyright status in the past while distinguishing it from the present by start time (P580)/end time (P582) qualifiers. --Jarekt (talk) 06:03, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Rights statements[edit]

Relevant to this subject, I have proposed a "rights statement" property, using the RightsStatements.org statements, here: Wikidata:Property proposal/rights statement. Dominic (talk) 14:43, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Help:Copyrights[edit]

I began working on Help:Copyrights which I was hoping would become a help page for copyright statements. Please comment (on Help talk:Copyrights) or expand. We can also use more diverse examples. --Jarekt (talk) 06:08, 16 December 2018 (UTC)