Template talk:PD-China

Sources:

[1] (from a law firm in China)
[2] (from the PRC, in Chinese)
[3] (From a policy paper, PDF)

– Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 16:01, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Do the same applies to Hong Kong and Macao? Each of them is separate legal jurisdiction from mainland China. — Insta ntnood 02:23, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

Question about the Template:PD-China[edit]

Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China[edit]

I'm afraid the description in "Template: PD China" looks wrong and is against international law.

(1) Even photographic works don't enter the public doman fifty years after they were created but fifty years after they were first published.

(2) The template says, "This image was created in China", but place of creation has nothing to do with the term of protecting copyright even in the new/old Chinese copyright laws.

I hope the description of the template will be properly amended soon.

Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China 2001

Section 3 Term of Protection for rights

Article 21

...

The term of protection for the right of publication or protection for the right of publication or the rights referred to in Article l0, paragraphs (5) to (17), of this Law in respect of a cinematographic work, a work created by virtue of an analogous method of film production or a photographic work shall be fifty years, and expires on 3l December of the fiftieth year after the first publication of such work, provided that any such work that has not been published within fifty years after the completion of its creation shall no longer be protected under this Law.
Source:New Copyright Law & Old Copyright Law of the PRC

Copyright Law of the Republic of China[edit]

Photographic works don't enter the public doman fifty years after they were created but fifty years after they were published.

Copyright Law of the Republic of China 1998

Article 34 Economic rights for photographic works, audiovisual works, sound recordings, computer programs and performances endure for fifty years after the public release of the work.
Source:New Copyright Law of the PRC

--Watanabe Hisashi 05:03, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it like.. either law protects works first published within its jurisdiction, regardless of where the works were created? — Insta ntnood 14:08, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Separate templates[edit]

Should there be separate templates for the PRC and the ROC, e.g., template:PD-PRC and template:PD-ROC? Template:PD-China can perhaps be kept for pre-ROC (pre-1912) works. — Insta ntnood 14:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

why? PD is PD. There's no need to create a PD template for every country in the world provided the rules are the same. same case here--Jiang 20:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if the rules are exactly the same. Many PD templates have already been created. — Insta ntnood 09:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People's Republic of China in 1946???[edit]

The People's Republic of China was not established until 1949. The template needs fixing up. --Sumple (Talk) 04:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The impotant point in that section is the "source country" as defined by 17 U.S.C. 104A, which would be the PRC for works first published within the current copyright jurisdiction of the PRC (excluding Hong Kong and Macao), even if they were first published between 1946 and 1949. Physchim62 (talk) 10:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious claims of copyright[edit]

The claims on this tag are all over the place. First off, the tag is claiming the PRC existed in 1923, based upon a treaty signed in 1904, but the PRC didn't exist until much later, and the document being cited as support for this claim (I fixed the link as the old one didn't work) has a footnote explicitly saying that the "The government of the People's Republic of China views this treaty as not binding." The PRC, as best as I can determine so far, did not even have any copyright laws until 1990 or so. When they signed the Berne Convention they started following rules, but it doesn't suddenly turn things that were public domain into copyright, not by U.S. laws anyway. So if they say copyrights expire after such a length of time, that'd be starting when the law existed, not things prior to that.

If these claims are going to remain on this tag they need to be explicitly supported with accurate and reliable sources. DreamGuy (talk) 19:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea when United States copyright had any sovereignty over Chinese material released under Chinese copyright. It is completely preposterous. The only "copyright" that needs to be obliged is the first one on this talk page, which clearly states that the copyright law in China follows WTO or something or other treaties and is 50 years long. The text of the template says that the image (if using the text) is in PD because it was released more than 50 years ago. Nothing else needs to be mentioned. Doing so will only add to confusion. And as for previous material when there was no treaties, I am 99.99% sure that they don't get converted. So the date is inaccurate regardless. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 01:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]