Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2017 November 2

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 2

Free availability of texts by B. Russell

An enormous body of texts by Bertrand Russell is available online. Who "abandoned" the copyright and where can this decision be found in writing? GEEZER^{nil nisi bene} 07:37, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Maybe they are copyright violations and no one has ordered them to be taken down. Or maybe they aren't copyright violations at all. Without any specific example to go on, no one here can evaluate your question to give it a meaningful answer, since we have no evidence your suppositions are correct. Your question inherently contains the plurium interrogationum fallacy, famously the "When did you stop beating your wife?" problem. First, provide evidence to establish that your suppositions are true, THEN we can answer your second question. Until then, we don't even know the basis for your main question is meaningful. --Jayron32 10:42, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Note: The initial question was altered from what I responded to. My response may or may not make any sense since it answered a differet question. --Jayron32 11:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

• Now that you HAVE provided evidence, I see that many of of those works dates from before 1923. Copyright law of the United States is such that all works published before 1923 are all in the public domain. for the United Kingdom, the Copyright law of the United Kingdom states that, for works published before 1911, the term is author's life + 7 years, for works published after that date it is author's life + 50 years. As Russell died in 1970, his works ALL became public domain in 2010 in the UK, and those published before 1911 became public domain in 1977. For U.S. published works on that page which are later than 1923, that page does not publish them, but rather directs you to the actual copyright holder, for example this U.S. published article, linked on your page, directs readers to the original publication, to preserve copyright, being an American publication it is still under copyright. This work for example, is from 1910, so is in the public domain in both US and UK. This work is also in the public domain; though its date is too recent for the U.S. copyright to have expired, it was originally published in the UK, meaning that it is in the public domain there. --Jayron32 12:00, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

That was what I was looking for. Thanks. GEEZER^{nil nisi bene} 13:06, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

2010 is only 40 years after Russell's death, so unless there is some other reason, they won't all become public domain until 2020. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:09, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Crap. Math is hard. --Jayron32 13:24, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

As stated in the article linked above, the 1995 Regulations were retroactive, so copyright expires 70 years from the end of the calendar year of the author's death (i.e. 2040). The expiry dates noted above are no longer relevant. MChesterMC (talk) 16:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

For clarification, this obviously isn't legal advice but I should point out the above responses after Jayron32 only appear to relate to the UK situation. This may affect the situation elsewhere, but not always. In the particular case of the US, generally for everything other than sound recordings and in some cases non English works, it's normally accepted that if it receive an authorised publication before 1923 that version is now in the public domain in the US see [1], [2], [3], [4] and the earlier linked Copyright law of the United States. While the Uruguay Round Agreements Act controversially gave copyright protection to stuff that had been in the public domain in US, it didn't generally affect stuff published before 1923. As one of the sources mentions, what "published" means (as well as whether it was authorised) is also sometimes controversial.

But ultimately, for any of Russell's works which did receive authorised publication before 1923 and are in English, these work would almost definitely be in the public domain in the US. As the above site seems to be a US site, they may not care whether it's still eligible for copyright protection in the UK. As I said, this isn't legal advice and if you actually plan to use any of the works yourself in any way, you should seek that yourself somewhere suitable (i.e. not here).

For stuff intended for the Wikimedia Commons, in most cases works need to be in the public domain in both the country of origin and in the US to be uploaded there, as it increases the chance the work will be in the public domain elsewhere if it's so in the country of origin. (But not always, hence why the work also has to be in the public domain in the US since the Wikimedia Commons is a US website.) Content can generally be uploaded to en.wikipedia itself if it's only in the public domain in the US, but the works would need to be something we have use for. However it would be best to seek the advice of someone more familiar with our copyright norms than me before uploading anything to either en.wikipedia or Commons.

Nil Einne (talk) 11:22, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

As to the actual question, the books appear to be hosted by the Bertrand Russell Society, which our article states was founded by (among others) his only daughter. Not sure whether she would have inherited the copyright. I'm failing to find a good source for this (and the references I have are not ones I can share), but there is no mechanism for "abandonment" of copyright in the UK. Putting a work in the public domain is effectively licensing the work to everyone, which amounts to the same thing, but is legally distinct. MChesterMC (talk) 16:53, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

His only daughter was not his only heir (he also had two sons who survived him, but are now dead but have living children). So the copyright issue unfortunately can't be resolved on that basis. - Nunh-huh 22:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

See [5], [6], [7].

The most authoritative of these sources says that the copyright in a published work expires seventy years after publication. If that's true, some or all of the writings are in the public domain. Copyright law of the United Kingdom does not mention this, however the last external link confirms it. Section 5(1) of the regulations, however, which is the ultimate authority, says that time runs from publication rather than death only if nobody knows who wrote the work. 80.5.88.70 (talk) 08:32, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

I wouldn't say some random commercial service is that authoritative. I definitely wouldn't say it's more authoritative than the UK government [8] who say it's "70 years after the author’s death" for "Written, dramatic, musical and artistic work". (Although that doesn't deal with older works instead says you should contact them.) Also what do you mean by "last external link confirms it"? The last external link seems to be [9] and it doesn't say "copyright in a published work expires seventy years after publication". If anything it seems to say something similar to your last sentence i.e. copyright is from publication only if the author is unknown (although it's a little more complicated than that). In other words, AFAICT MChesterMC comment above is correct and it's 70 years from author's death in the UK. Nil Einne (talk) 11:57, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, there are two tracks on that flowchart and I took the wrong track. I can't get through to the government website. Please explain what this message means:

Your connection is not private Attackers might be trying to steal your information from www.gov.uk (for example, passwords, messages or credit cards). Learn more NET::ERR_CERT_AUTHORITY_INVALID ReloadHIDE ADVANCED www.gov.uk normally uses encryption to protect your information. When Google Chrome tried to connect to www.gov.uk this time, the website sent back unusual and incorrect credentials. This may happen when an attacker is trying to pretend to be www.gov.uk, or a Wi-Fi sign-in screen has interrupted the connection. Your information is still secure because Google Chrome stopped the connection before any data was exchanged. You cannot visit www.gov.uk right now because the website uses HSTS. Network errors and attacks are usually temporary, so this page will probably work later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.5.88.70 (talk) 13:48, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Forget that. I've switched to another browser, which is problem free. 80.5.88.70 (talk) 13:56, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

What painting is this from?

Can someone help me track down the painting from which the below image is an extract?

https://pixady.com/image/0imp/

(Note, I didn't want to upload the image to Wikipedia itself, so used a third party image hosting service for sake of ease).

Thanks in advance.

Discounttents (talk) 11:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

My guess is this is a painting or illustration about the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Compare the subject matter to some of the images here. I don't find your exact painting, but something about it (the canoes, the style of tent and dress, the giant Rocky Mountains like wall behind them) gives it that feel. --Jayron32 11:19, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

It reminds me of naive paintings from Greenland. GEEZER^{nil nisi bene} 11:46, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

There seems do be a signature (?) on the tent to the right? (www.tineye.com doesn't find another copy.) GEEZER^{nil nisi bene} 11:49, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

To add a bit more information, it's being used in an item related to the North Pole, so I was wondering along the lines of something North Pole related. As you say, though, TinEye didn't turn up any matches. Now is the winter of our discount tents (talk) 12:04, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

CAUTION - When I selected the OP's link, my virus checker flagged it as a threat. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:04, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

This is Thomas A Binks, Caught in the Ice [10]. --Viennese Waltz 12:21, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

There the signature on the tent is clearly readable.

"Painting by Thomas Binks of Hull whaling ship The Dauntless, which was caught in ice and sank off Greenland in 1829. You can see the crew salvaging the ship's contents. A model of another whaling ship, The Swan, is on display at Hull Maritime Museum, along with its log book." GEEZER^{nil nisi bene} 12:54, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

And finally; Thomas Binks, 1799–1852; other sources state that he was a colleague of John Ward (painter). Alansplodge (talk) 13:08, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Pointless bickering over who should be thanked 2001:8003:533A:DA00:C580:2AAA:3E41:5BF8 (talk) 15:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you all for your input. Much appreciated. Now is the winter of our discount tents (talk) 13:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC) Presumably you actually intended to thank me alone, since I was the one who actually found the answer? --Viennese Waltz 13:36, 2 November 2017 (UTC) Did you actually just write that? Really?!? --Jayron32 14:39, 2 November 2017 (UTC) Apparently so. I expected some additional credit over and above the other contributors to this thread, since it was a pretty impressive piece of identification. --Viennese Waltz 15:00, 2 November 2017 (UTC) It was, but credit is one of those things that loses all value once it is begged for... --Jayron32 15:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC) No, I intended to thank all those who contributed to the answer, in whatever form and in whatever proportion, for taking the time to answer the question. Which is why I typed thank you "all" for your input. And I stand by that, twat-ish follow-ups notwithstanding. Now is the winter of our discount tents Discounttents (talk) 11:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC) Please use "twit", since the word you used is a reference to female genitalia, and not very polite at all, in American English. μηδείς (talk) 02:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC) Staggeringly, not all of us speak "American" English. Now is the winter of our discount tents (talk) 23:03, 4 November 2017 (UTC) Not yet, but when America is Made Great Again … —Tamfang (talk) 05:33, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Jayron32 posting wild guesses is not helpful to anyone and neither is trolling other people’s comments. Legacypac (talk) 16:39, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

When have I ever been helpful? I've never made that claim. --Jayron32 17:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Just in the last few days, Legacypac seems to have anointed himself the ref desk dictator. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:45, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

He makes a valid point though; please refrain from guessing until all other evidence-based avenues have been explored. Alansplodge (talk) 21:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Of course his point is valid; I have never claimed to be helpful, so reminders of that aren't really moving the conversation along. Please do keep up, this is getting repetitive. --Jayron32 12:10, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

For future reference, this painting is held at the Ferens Art Gallery, in the North Sea city of Hull, England. The Ferens lies across the main city square from Hull Maritime Museum, which hosts an impressive collection relating to the once enormous fishing and whaling industries, and, through this history, items made by the people of the Arctic. Often when whaling or exploring ships were iced in, Inuit visited and traded. There's quite a painting genre of icebound ships: [11] [12] not to mention the Whaling Disaster of 1871 for context. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 20:21, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

How is Day of the Dead different from All Saints Day?

In other words, is the former just the Spanish version of All Saints Day or a little bit different meaning that people actually celebrate both separately as different events? 140.254.70.33 (talk) 15:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Comparing the articles Day of the Dead to All Saints' Day explains the difference quite easily. It should be noted that the Day of the Dead is not a Spanish holiday. It is unknown in Spain. It's a Mexican holiday. It also doesn't originate from a Christian tradition, whereas All Saint's Day does. --Jayron32 15:45, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

All Saints' Day originates from the pre-Christian Celtic tradition of Samhain, which the Church Christianized by investing it with the power of not just one saint (like John the Baptist for Midsummer's Day) but all saints. (The idea is probably independent of Samhain, but settling the date near the end of October almost certainly reflects Celtic tradition.) -- Elphion (talk) 16:11, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Not an expert User:Elphion, but isn't it a bit of a stretch to claim that an Irish festival influenced Pope Gregory III when he set the date for All Souls Day in 8th century Rome? [13] Alansplodge (talk) 16:45, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Though the name is Irish, Samhain was the beginning of the Celtic year, and the folk tradition lingered well into Christian times throughout the Celtic areas of Euruope. -- Elphion (talk) 17:44, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

But no evidence of a link except the date? Alansplodge (talk) 18:01, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

The last paragraph of the lead to All Saints' Day has some material (and refs) to help with your research on this topic. Matt Deres (talk) 19:57, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

It is worth noting that while the celebration's origin is not Christian, it has become associated with the Catholic celebration of All Souls' Day (Día de los Fieles Difuntos, or "Day of the Faithful Departed" in Spanish). As Jayron32 mentions, the articles do a good job of explaining the differences. –FlyingAce^✈hello 14:45, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

140.254.70.33 -- All Saint's Day is a Christian religious occasion on the Catholic liturgical calendar. Día de Muertos is a Mexican cultural celebration beginning on All Saint's Day whose general overall theme seems to be death. Halloween is an Irish and U.S. cultural celebration on the night before All Saint's Day whose theme (insofar as there is a general theme) is fear. AnonMoos (talk) 20:35, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Halloween (All-Hallow's Eve to give it its Christian church name), in Scotland was thought of as a day when the barrier between this world and the next was weak. This belief was almost certainly pagan in origin. To confuse the spirits than managed to break through, people dressed as ghosts and goblins. LongHairedFop (talk) 16:32, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

---

See Santa Muerte, which has been denounced by the Catholic Church, Ohio State. μηδείς (talk) 03:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC)