Wikipedia talk:Copyright situations by country

Public domain in Denmark[edit]

According to the Danish Consolidated Act on Copyright of 2003 (§70, 2) all photographic images not considered to be "works of art" become public domain 50 years after they were created. ka la ha 16:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but if that's anything like German law (and it probably is), nearly all photographs are considered "works of art". – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 17:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights or List of countries' copyright length - redundancy[edit]

I think there is a considerable redundancy between this page and Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights or List of countries' copyright length. There are also some factual and referential inconsistencies. IMO they should be merged or one should be referring to the other one. Also, as you can see in the revision history, this page does not receive much attention, in contrast to the other pages. --Dr. Friendly (talk) 11:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? --Dr. Friendly (talk) 16:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the information is also largely duplicated at Commons:Commons:Licensing. See also Lupo's list of particularly hairy situations at Commons:User:Lupo/Hairy copyright. I have tried, in the past, to merge these, but became overwhelmed at the size of the task. To be complete, each country should have many paragraphs of detailed information. Look at all that must be considered: Does this concern text, photographs, or something else? (The rules are very different in different countries.) In what country was the work created? Where was it first published? What was the nationality of the author? Was it a corporate work (for those countries that respect such things.) For a work created in Argentina by a German national, it is very different than a work created in France by an Egyptian national, and it's hard to determine which "jurisdiction" covers the copyright even under U.S. law. What country's laws of minimal creative intent, etc., apply.

If each statement is footnoted (and it certainly should be), then it will depend on whether case law or statutory applies (for those countries that make such a distinction), and whether the applicable law is "inherited" from the law of a previous country (such as Pakistani copyright law assumed to inherit aspects of British law unless otherwise specified), etc. Further, much of the "known facts" can't really be sourced, since they were never litigated. After researching this and planning it for about a week, I learned that I am incapable of turning this mishmash of information into a useful and dependable guide. – Quadell ^(talk) 22:52, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bhutan??[edit]

I noticed on this page that Bhutan was listed as no treaty and this made me curious how the Bhutan government views copyright. I think the entry must be incorrect since it says 'No treaty' The first thing I find for Bhutan seems to suggest that Bhutan's government thinks it is party to the Berne Treaty on Copyrights:

Take the case of Bhutan and India, our closest friend and next-door neighbour since both States are contracting parties of the Berne Convention.

From http://www.ipbhutan.gov.bt/what_is_copyright.aspx - site of the Intellectual Property Division, Ministry Of Economic Affairs, Royal Government of Bhutan

rs2 (talk) 17:01, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yemen[edit]

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ38a.pdf contains the following quotes :

Yemen · Berne (Paris) July 14, 2008; WTO June 26, 2014

another quote:

WTO · World Trade Organization (WTO), established pursuant to the Marrakesh Agreement of Apr. 15, 1994, to implement the Uruguay Round Agreements. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is one of the WTO agreements. It includes substantive obligations for the protection of copyright and other intellectual property rights as well as their enforcement. The effective date of United States membership in the WTO is Jan. 1, 1995.

This source can probably be used to update and improve the page, I have added it as an external link for now.

The Quixotic Potato (talk) 12:37, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Serbia and Montenegro[edit]

According to [[1]] the normal copyright term is now life +70. ww2censor (talk) 12:46, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This page is redundant[edit]

This page has had {{Update}} on it for seven years. An actively maintained version of this page exists, however; I think we should just soft-redirect this to Commons:Copyright rules by territory, a much more comprehensive, detailed, and accurate set of pages that serve the same function. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 02:49, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - the Commons pages provide much more detail about the copyright rules than this page -- Whpq (talk) 02:55, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support, but check whether there is anything here of value that should have been in mainspace, eg at List of countries' copyright lengths. My guess is no. — SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:26, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've redirected the page; if anyone wants to recycle some of the content it's always in the page history. Frostly (talk) 01:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]