Commons:Deletion requests/File:BWR Mark I Containment, cutaway.jpg

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.

File:BWR_Mark_I_Containment,_cutaway.jpg

[edit]
related: Commons:Deletion requests/File:BWR Mark I Containment, diagram.png

delete Not government work, creation of private industry Theanphibian (talk) 19:29, 14 March 2011 (UTC) To add more detail, the page itself notes that report is from 2006 but the image is older. Uploader assumed that image was the work of Sandia National Lab because it was in a report from the Lab, but that is not the case, it was created before then, almost certainly by the vendor General Electric, as it is a stylized rendering of the containment. It would be nice to have a production of a national lab representing the containment, but this is not it. Theanphibian (talk) 19:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC) Also nominating File:BWR Mark I Containment, diagram.png. Theanphibian (talk) 19:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You guessed right. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/teachers/03.pdf shows the same image with General Electric watermark. --Hydrox (talk) 21:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC) http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/bwrs.html links to [1], what appears to have a remake of the diagram. Is it safe to assume it is government-made? --Hydrox (talk) 21:24, 14 March 2011 (UTC) Not needed, copyright has expired, see below. --Hydrox (talk) 22:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The copyright for this image has most likely expired. The first commercially-operated nuclear power reactor in the U.S. was the Dresden 1 reactor. Operating license was issued on 1 January, 1960, and the reactor was decommissioned in 1978. It was based on the Mark I design. So the picture above most likely predates 1964, and is thus in the public domain in the U.S., unless its copyright was renewed. --Hydrox (talk) 22:39, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I have to conclude that this might after all be a copyvio. I didn't consider above that the same document contains diagrams of the Mark-II & Mark-III designs as well, and Mark-III didn't start operating until 1970s. Assuming these diagrams were drawn by the same person around the same time, they would have probably been published after 1963 and would be copyrighted to GE.
[2] has, in small letters, "GEZ-4396" written under the image. This is a General Electric publication reference code. [3] has a search engine for GE publications. But it does not find anything for this reference. If someone has access to GE publication archive index, he/she could verify with this reference # the exact date of publication.. --Hydrox (talk) 04:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is no acknowledgement of external copyright, or any thanks to GE, in the Sandia source doc (produced under contract to the NRC). Could this lend support to the notion it is copyright expired, so does not need acknowledgement by Sandia? Rwendland (talk) 23:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great if someone could provide the expired copyright rationale with the proper tags. I am personally not knowledgeable enough to do this, but hopefully we can attract the attention of a user with some better legal know-how. I would caution, however, that the fact that it's legal to use or could be defended doesn't make it in compliance with the Wikimedia Commons policy. It could be possible that it's likely PD but can't be assuredly proven, and then it'll be deleted anyway. Theanphibian (talk) 03:35, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and change copyright tag. OK, here goes with the PD argument: US copyright law 1923-1977 is if the image as distributed was not tagged with a "(c) Whoever, Year" notice, then the image is Public Domain.[4] We strongly believe that General Electric created this image, and distributed it without copyright notice, during this period when the Mark I containment was being marketed and built. Page 3-16 of this US NRC document[5] appears to show the entire distributed image, merely tagged "General Electric ... GEZ-4396", indicating a full copyright notice was not used by General Electric. The fact that Sandia National Lab and US NRC reproduce this image without credit or acknowledgment to General Electric supports this argument that this image is without copyright (Public Domain). Rwendland (talk) 12:55, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is, the original publication GEZ-4396 was probably published with a copyright notice. If you look at the database of the GE publications, they are always published with a copyright notice, at least today. Not enough evidence to support assuming it was first published without copyright notice. --Hydrox (talk) 18:44, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined to think it was published as a marketing poster without a legal copyright notice. That was common in the 1950s I believe, before colour TV and many magazines. I suspect it was reproduced in full in the NRC BWR training manual.Rwendland (talk) 16:41, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep it for at least a month. This is timely information and the image is the most detailed and credible that I have seen. Give the copyright status the benefit of the doubt, please. 67.122.210.104 00:22, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I second that motion, tho want to keep it for 6 months, it is the only decent model/diagram of a GE Mark 1 reactor, so in the news. No one else has info.—Preceding unsigned comment was added by 174.7.23.169 (talk) (UTC)

We recently had a user contribute a hand-drawn sketch, File:BWR Mark I Containment sketch.png. This should do. Theanphibian (talk) 03:35, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consider keeping this illustration under a fair-use rationale. From what I know at this time, the illustration by the manufacturer of Fukushima reactor and sufficiently accurately depicts the Fukushima reactor structure. I would consider this illustration kind of "officially accurate" and can see no way how to find a replacement under a cc-license. In case of complex technical articles, accuracy of illustrations is desirable, even necessary, to provide appropriate explanation of the article's subject. Another aspect of "fair use" could be documentation of how these types of reactors were depicted (advertised?) in 1960s/70s. -- 109.90.167.117 08:30, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is interesting that someone decided this image should be tagged for removal now when we are all looking at the real thing on TV. The image should not be taken down for political reasons. It is particularly relevant that we should have access to an acurate diagram of this type of reactor now.Djapa84 (talk) 12:07, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is Wikimedia Commons. Commons does not accept fair-use content. Also, as a free alternative exists, I see no case for fair-use in those individual Wikipedias that allow fair-use content either. --Hydrox (talk) 13:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hydrox, I'm puzzled. Have you changed your mind that there is a good Public Domain argument for keeping, as you made above? Rwendland (talk) 14:52, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please read my reasoning above. --Hydrox (talk) 18:44, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is no free alternative, since many details are shown only in this image, eg the spent fuel pool on the upper right below the crane. This is the pool (and its problematic position) which caused the fire in block 4. Keep --WolfgangRieger (talk) 17:08, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- 16:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Would a drawing (eg SVG) showing the same content solve any copyvio problem? --WolfgangRieger (talk) 17:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The title page of the original report clearly indicates that this is a work for hire for the United States Government. It is therefore public domain. There is no copyright notice. Sandina uses copyright notices for things that are copyrighted (see their website, for example). --Selket (talk) 19:29, 15 March 2011 (UTC) Keep Is it really possible to enter such an unnecesary discussion. This ilustration is certainly more than public and more than "Govermental" enough, comming from this publication: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Job Code Y6757. Inge Holst Jacobsen. 15:07, 16 March 2011[reply]

Keep Either keep this drawing or substitute the extremely similar drawing that is hosted by the Nuclear REgulatory Commision on their BWR page. See page two of this PDF. http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/generic-bwr.pdf Clearly this is the same drawing reproduced on a US government site in slightly less resolution. User: Sherifftruman

Delete Just because the NRC has violated the copyright for this image does NOT mean it falls into US Government public domain. 142.244.60.133 20:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Clearly work of General Electric and most probably published orginally with a copyright note. (In addition: We can not keep it as fair use. But you can link in the articles to this PDF. ALE! ¿…? 08:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:BWR_Mark_I_Containment,_cutaway.jpg&oldid=52073519"