Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Alan Turing

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

Files in Category:Alan Turing

[edit]

The photographer of this 1928 photograph of Alan Turing, taken in Sherborne, Dorset, England where he went to school at the time, is claimed to be unknown. But that is not true, it's a photographer named Chaffin from Sherborne, see [1] ("Chaffin" at the lower left of the photo), [2] (page 4) and also en:Talk:Alan Turing/Archive 4#May a photo of Christopher Morcom be added? with more sources and details. That would be a photographer from Sherborne photo studio W. M. Chaffin & Sons. There were several photographers from that family working in that studio. Eliminating those that died before 1928, we are left with two photographers possibly active in 1928: William Matthew Chaffin Jr (1861-1937), son of the studio's founder also named William Matthew Chaffin, and his son Arthur Reginald Chaffin (1893-1954). I've corroborated the death years of both with Ancestry.

We don't know for certain which of the two took the photo, William Matthew Junior (aged 67 at the time) or Arthur Reginald (aged 35). The possibility that it was the latter is rather high in my opinion, so per COM:PCP, there is significant doubt about the freedom of this photograph.

Also, the US copyright of a 1928 British photograph was restored by the URAA, so the photograph is still protected in the US until the end of 2023.

Given these circumstances, the files should be deleted. They can be restored in 2025 when both UK and US copyrights should have expired.

Rosenzweig τ 17:14, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep It appears that we have two possibilities and Rosenzweig has chosen the youngest person so that the image is still under copyright, and ignored the older so that the image is in the public domain. If we don't know which of the two, or an unnamed third assistant, it would still be anonymous. I don't think we should delete based on a coin flip. --RAN (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This situation means that there is significant doubt, and COM:PCP says delete in such a case. Plus there's the URAA issue which you did not address at all in your statement. --Rosenzweig τ 09:34, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A coin toss is 50/50, maybe 51% would be more significant than 50%. --RAN (talk) 00:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Of course 51 is more than 50, but 50 is already significant enough. We now have the info from the school archive btw which says that that the photo was "most probably" taken by the son, so the younger of the two. And you still did not address the URAA issue at all. --Rosenzweig τ 11:54, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete per COM:PCP and URAA. Unless those who want these to kept can show evidence that the elder Chaffin is the photographer rather than the younger one, then we could restore this next year. If the authorship is 50/50 chance of still being under copyright in the UK, it is sensible that we assume that the younger one is the photographer. And even if this were anonymous which it isn't, it would have still been restored by URAA because 1999 is after 1996. Abzeronow (talk) 16:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep The Alan Turing file was nominated for deletion on 15 October 2015 but the verdict was to keep. Do we really need to renominate previously adjudicated files? -- WikiPedant (talk)
Yes, if circumstances have changed like in this case. The previous DR did not mention the photographer Chaffin at all and was closed as PD-UK-unknown looks fine. But as demonstrated, the photographer is not unknown. --Rosenzweig τ 19:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@FunnyMath: You would not forward it at all, because forwarded e-mails are not accepted as permissions (apparently there was too much misunderstanding and abuse in the past). Instead, such an e-mail should be sent directly by the one giving the permission to the address named at the COM:VRT page (see there for details, the text that should be used etc.) There's also an "interactive release generator" there (COM:VRT/CONSENT). Regards --Rosenzweig τ 11:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, got it. FunnyMath (talk) 11:39, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I got permission to make the email public. I also asked for information about a photo of Christopher Morcom, which is unrelated to the deletion discussion:

Dear [Name omitted]


This is what I have managed to ascertain about both the Alan Turing and the Christopher Morcom photographs:


Photograph of Alan Turing taken by Chaffin of Sherborne in 1928.

The photograph would have been taken by either William Matthew Chaffin (1861-1937) or his son Arthur Reginald Chaffin (1893-1954), but most probably by the latter. Arthur Reginald Chaffin died on 24 June 1954 at South Street, Sherborne, aged 60. We cannot prove that the photograph was commissioned by Alan Turing, though this seems likely.

The photograph was first published in 1959 in Sara Turing’s Alan M. Turing (Cambridge, Heffer & Sons Ltd., 1959) with the caption ‘Alan at Sherborne School. Aged 16. Photograph by Chaffin, Sherborne. (Copyright).’

The photograph (signed ‘Chaffin, Sherborne’ and ‘Alan M. Turing’) was part of a collection of material given to Sherborne School by Alan’s mother, Mrs Ethel Sara Turing, between October 1965 and 1967 (Accession no. 2011/006) and is held in the Sherborne School Archives.


Photograph of Christopher Morcom cropped from the Upper 5th form group photograph taken in 1927.

There is no photographer’s name on the Upper 5th form photograph, which includes Christopher Morcom, but it was probably taken by William Matthew Chaffin (1861-1937) or his son Arthur Reginald Chaffin (1893-1954), but most probably by the latter. Arthur Reginald Chaffin died on 24 June 1954 at South Street, Sherborne, aged 60. We cannot prove that the photograph was commissioned by Sherborne School but because the Upper 5th form photograph was taken annually this seems very likely. Copies would have been made available for purchase by the boys and staff at Sherborne School.

The photograph is contained in an album of Upper 5th form photographs for the years 1919 to 1945 held in the Sherborne School Archives.


Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

[Name omitted]

This is from the Sherborne School Archives. FunnyMath (talk) 12:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So ... some more details, but nothing really important we did not already know. Specifically, they do not know which of the two Chaffins took the Turing photo. But since the situation is the same for the photo of C. Morcom, that one should be safe for Wikimedia Commons in 2025, just as the Turing photo. Thank you for asking them. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 12:29, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. Just to confirm, would it be necessary to confirm the authenticity of the email with VRTS? FunnyMath (talk) 12:38, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so, not for the Turing photo, all relevant information was already there. Only if you want to really make sure for the Morcom photo that the "photographer = one of two Chaffins" information (relevant for copyright) is officially documented somehow. --Rosenzweig τ 14:24, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I asked the archivist to send a copy of the email to VRTS, but they might not be willing to do that. Either way, it should be admissible evidence in that case. FunnyMath (talk) 14:29, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I inadvertently caused this lengthy and detailed discussion about three years ago when I made what I thought to be an innocuous request. Since Mr. Morcom was warranted to rate his own subsection on Mr. Turing’s Wikipedia article due solely to his youthful association with Mr. Turing, I asked if a photograph of him could be added to his subsection. I also pointed out a photo of him cropped from a group school photo that I found online and asked if someone with more tech skills than myself (i.e., almost any editor on Wiki!) could put the photo on the article having, at the time, no idea of the copyright considerations such would involve.
Having read the discussion here, I would like to ask if it is certain that the actual photographer owns the rights to a photo he or she took (assuming the subject does not) or whether his studio employer does? Merely because the name “Chaffin” appears on the photo of Mr. Turing, does that necessarily mean that either of the two Chaffins discussed here actually took the photo? More to the point, even if the younger Chaffin did, as his father was still alive at the time the photo was taken, could that possibly mean that his father, as the owner of the studio, owned the rights?
I believe that some or maybe even most of Matthew Brady’s famed American Civil War photos were not taken by him personally, but rather by his employees, yet he seems to have owned the rights to all of them as he tried to sell the collection when he encountered financial difficulties later on.
Finally, thank you, FunnyMath, for your apology to me on my home page for taking so long to research this matter, but such was totally unwarranted! You were never under any obligation to do anything at all. Still, I appreciate your courtesy in the matter and for taking such pains (whenever such was done) to research matters so thoroughly. You are a credit to Wiki! Best regards!HistoryBuff14 (talk) 18:47, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HistoryBuff14: The important question for us is not who owns the copyright of a photo but how its copyright term (the duration) is determined. I researched this a while ago for another deletion request. The UK's current en:Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, section 9 ("Authorship of work.") says "In this Part “author”, in relation to a work, means the person who creates it." Section 12 ("Duration of copyright in literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works.") says "Copyright expires at the end of the period of 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author dies, subject as follows.", followed by some more detailed rules for special types of works. Accd. to section 4 ("Artistic works."), photographs are artistic works. So it is clear: The author of a photograph in the UK is a human being, namely the photographer. It is not some sort of corporate entity, company or such, it is also not an employer. Copyright expires 70 years after the death of the person who is the author. As far as we could determine, the Chaffin & Sons studio was a small family-owned studio without any branches and only two photographers active in 1928, namely William Matthew Chaffin Jr and his son Arthur Reginald Chaffin. --Rosenzweig τ 21:11, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Rosenzweig is right. It's the lifetime of the author that determines the length of the copyright, not the lifetime of the copyright holder.
As for the copyright holder of the Turing photo and the Morcom photo, it's most likely Sherborne School itself. In Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alan Turing Aged 16.jpg, DieSwartzPunkt said "... I am aware of someone that I know having just obtained a copy of a photograph from Sherborne school for use in some Alan Turing related publication (a very similar photo clearly taken at the same time). Sherborne school were adamant that they owned the copyright and proper attribution had to be made if the photograph was used..." This was eight years ago, but I'm sure the copyright holder is still the same.
Since Sherborne School apparently asserted their copyright in the past, and the archivist has said the author is most likely the younger Chaffin, I would say we should  Delete the photos. People who use the photos without the school's permission are very likely to get into legal trouble. FunnyMath (talk) 15:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, whatever you guys think is proper. However, I feel badly as I certainly never wanted to have Mr. Turing’s photo removed, just Mr. Morcom’s added. Thanks again for your efforts.HistoryBuff14 (talk) 16:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine. We'll soon be able to use both photos in 2025, which is pretty soon relatively speaking (since copyright terms tend to last for a long time). If we hadn't done the research, then we would have to assume that the photos would enter the public domain in the US in 2048 (1927+121) and 2049 (1928+121). FunnyMath (talk) 16:36, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We can continue to use the photo of Alan Turing that's on English Wikipedia, but we would have to re-upload it on English Wikipedia instead of Commons. The resolution of the image would have to be reduced, and it would be used under fair use. There's no other public domain or freely licensed photo of Turing that I'm aware of, so it should stay on the article. FunnyMath (talk) 23:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We have two other photos of Turing on Commons, both said to be in the public domain:
If the authors are truly unknown, then we would have to change the current photo to one of those two instead. FunnyMath (talk) 23:39, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HistoryBuff14: And thank you for starting the thread at the Alan Turing talk page. It helped inspire me to do the research on the photos in the first place. It was an enjoyable happy accident. FunnyMath (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination and ordered universal replacements with File:Alan Turing az 1930-as években.jpg where applicable. —holly {chat} 21:38, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Alan_Turing&oldid=796758577"