A number of photographs tagged as {{PD-UA-exempt}}. This tag does in general not apply to photos. The "governmental exception" is only for "official documents of a political, legislative or administrative nature (laws, decrees, resolutions, court awards, State standards, etc.) issued by government authorities within their powers, and official translations thereof". See also
:commons:User talk:Yakudza.
Irrelevant. It's not a "law, decree, resolution, court award, state standard, etc.", i.e., not an "official documents of a political, legislative or administrative nature". And the same goes for all the rest where someone added "work of the government" or "state-owned enterprise". These just do not fall under that exemption.
Lupo20:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I think this whole {{PD-UA-exempt}} section needs to be split off, because all of the images listed here can be keopt under one license or another. I'm just a bit annoyed at copyrights, pardon my frustration. —
Alex Khristov21:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I disagree. All of them (except maybe the enterprise logos) are copyrighted, and are not under any free license. At the utmost, they could be kept under some "fair use" claims. Each image would need a separate claim for each use, and all would need to give a detailed rationale.
Lupo10:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Image:Oleksandr Moroz Nemyriv.jpg (does not qualify under "news reporting" section; that is also in the Berne Convention and applies only to strictly factual text accounts, but never to photographs, since photos always involve judgments by the photographer (angle, lighting, etc.))
Read section (d); symbols and signs of enterprises, institutions and organizations; It is a symbol of an [govn't-owned] organization.
—dima/talk/21:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Doh! Thanks for pointing that one out; don't know why I missed that. So company logos can only be trademarked in the Ukraine but not copyrighted?
Lupo07:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)reply
The {{PD-UA-exempt}} tag should be corrected to make clear that it does not say that any photo on a Urkrainian government website were free. It should also make clear that the news reporting clause is useless for photos (maybe just remove that one).
Lupo09:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)reply
A number of photographs tagged as {{PD-UA-exempt}}. This tag does in general not apply to photos. The "governmental exception" is only for "official documents of a political, legislative or administrative nature (laws, decrees, resolutions, court awards, State standards, etc.) issued by government authorities within their powers, and official translations thereof". See also
:commons:User talk:Yakudza.
Irrelevant. It's not a "law, decree, resolution, court award, state standard, etc.", i.e., not an "official documents of a political, legislative or administrative nature". And the same goes for all the rest where someone added "work of the government" or "state-owned enterprise". These just do not fall under that exemption.
Lupo20:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I think this whole {{PD-UA-exempt}} section needs to be split off, because all of the images listed here can be keopt under one license or another. I'm just a bit annoyed at copyrights, pardon my frustration. —
Alex Khristov21:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I disagree. All of them (except maybe the enterprise logos) are copyrighted, and are not under any free license. At the utmost, they could be kept under some "fair use" claims. Each image would need a separate claim for each use, and all would need to give a detailed rationale.
Lupo10:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Image:Oleksandr Moroz Nemyriv.jpg (does not qualify under "news reporting" section; that is also in the Berne Convention and applies only to strictly factual text accounts, but never to photographs, since photos always involve judgments by the photographer (angle, lighting, etc.))
Read section (d); symbols and signs of enterprises, institutions and organizations; It is a symbol of an [govn't-owned] organization.
—dima/talk/21:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Doh! Thanks for pointing that one out; don't know why I missed that. So company logos can only be trademarked in the Ukraine but not copyrighted?
Lupo07:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)reply
The {{PD-UA-exempt}} tag should be corrected to make clear that it does not say that any photo on a Urkrainian government website were free. It should also make clear that the news reporting clause is useless for photos (maybe just remove that one).
Lupo09:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)reply