Talk:Visual China Group
Add topicLatest comment: 6 years ago by Mariogoods in topic other controversy: Visual China Group also now has copy rights to the famous Tiananmen Tank Man photo
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
other controversy: Visual China Group also now has copy rights to the famous Tiananmen Tank Man photo
[edit]The ownership chain in a story at techdirt. Chinese companies are known to comply with CCP orders. In seven more years, the Tiananmen Tank Man photo can legally be removed from world-wide distribution. 24.78.190.118 (talk) 20:30, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- What is the significance of seven more years? Did any other articles make reference to this? (if not, it is a WP:UNDUE weight on an uncommon perspective). ViperSnake151 Talk 23:00, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- For the significance of seven more years, I refer to text from the article:
- ″Gates had finally sold Corbis to a Chinese firm called Visual China Group. Part of the deal is that Corbis' main competitor, Getty Images [..] will get to handle all licensing on Corbis images outside of China for a period of 10 years. ″ [...] ″the control and rights ownership is now with a Chinese company, which may decide at some point to try to restrict the rights to those images globally.″
- Since this 'article' is from three years ago (at the time of my writing), it means there are seven more years left in the ten-year period before all world-wide distribution rights revert exclusively to VCC. VCC could, all quite legally by international laws, withdraw the Tankman image from availability for (world-wide) publication. Of course, there is still fair use of the image under copyright under certain circumstances, but if the article's prognostication (perhaps accusation) came to pass, the in/famous photograph will effectively be censored.
- Techdirt publicly reported this 'controversy'. I brought the link to the Talk page because I agree techdirt isn't especially reliable and hoped somebody would know better sources. I agree with your assessment that without better sources, this is WP:UNDUE 24.78.190.118 (talk) 07:17, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- I think realiable source should be provided to confirm this, then we could add it. Mariogoods (talk) 00:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)