Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Arbre d'or

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.

Category:Arbre d'or

All the files in the category:Arbre d'or exept one should be deleted. They represent a 3D art object by François Davin (born in 1945, living) that is located in Tréhorenteuc in France, where there’s sadly no freedom of panorama. We should wait seventy years after the death of the author to publish these images.

Are concerned :

the file: Arbre d'or 01.jpg;
the file: Arbre d'or 02.jpg;
the file: Arbre d'or 03.jpg;
the file: Arbre d'or Brocéliande.jpg;
the file: Arbre d'Or72.JPG;
the file: Arbre en or.jpg;
the file: L arbre d or Paimpont.JPG;
the file: Nojhan - The golden chesnut tree.jpg.

The file: Nojhan - Stones of the golden chesnut.jpg is not concerned, as it doesn’t represent the art sculpture. 37.170.114.205 10:09, 10 November 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Keep. I don't think this crosses the threshold of originality per COM:TOO France. Note that this is gold leaf covering a dead tree that died in a forest fire. As a (formerly) living thing, the tree is not a creative work. Descriptions of the work suggest that Davin covered the tree in gold leaf as he found it. The tree was not modified to suit Davin. Only its natural growth and destruction from the fire affected its shape. This is obviously a lot of work, but COM:TOO France does not ascribe to the sweat-of-the-brow doctrine. Something doesn't gain copyright there just because you spent a lot of effort. The threshold of originality in France is low, considering as copyrightable works that bear the "imprint of the personality of the author". I would argue that any author who decides to cover a tree in gold leaf is going to produce the exact same work, thereby failing this test. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:33, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete @IronGargoyle: France has very low TOO in terms of public sculptures. Per COM:FOP France, "a court recently (TGI Lyon, 4 April 2001, Buren & a. c/ Tassin & a.) emphasized that 'droit d'auteur unquestionably applies to the reproduction of artworks placed in public space.'" Inferring from this statement at COM:FOP France, there is no question to originality of sculptures or non-architectural works of France. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are quoting from COM:FOP France, but my argument has nothing to with freedom of panorama. I am saying that this is a threshold of originality issue for the "sculpture" itself. I understand that the threshold of originality is very low in France, but a French work still has to bear the imprint of the personality of the author to be copyrightable. The tree has a form entirely caused by its natural growth and the fire that killed it. The covering of gold leaf was effortful (sweat of the brow) but would have been the same no matter who applied the gold leaf. That is why this cannot be protected by copyright. IronGargoyle (talk) 04:26, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination and COM:PRP, who I am I to state this is not above threshold. --Ellywa (talk) 22:09, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]