Commons talk:Copyright rules by territory/Vietnam

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

FOP

[edit]

Looking at Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Vietnam#Freedom_of_panorama I see that "Photographing or televising of plastic art, architectural, photographic, applied-art works displayed at public places for the purpose of presenting images of these works." are okay.

I'm not native English speaking but to me it seems that it covers about everything. There is of course the "public places" and "purpose of presenting images" that we can wonder a bit about what means. Does present refer to the image or the DW?

For example product packaging. If located in a supermarket is this okay to take a photo? If is a public place and the purpose is to present it to make someone buy it. But does it matter who put it there?

I'm currently transferring images from vi.wiki to Commons and there are some photos of product packaging, paintings, books, and decorative figures. Normally I would say its not okay for Commons but with the wording for FOP I could use some help. --MGA73 (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @MGA73: I would say this means
    • You can make photographs of architecture and of photographs, sculptures and applied art displayed outdoors or perhaps in a public art gallery, museum, train station etc.
    • "Displayed" means that the work is being presented so it can be viewed as a work of art, as opposed to simply being visible
    • "For the purpose of presenting" applies to the derived work. There is no restriction on taking photographs for personal use.
    • Although a shop or supermarket is accessible to the public, it is privately owned and probably does not count as a public place.
    • Applied art is a functional object such as a chair or cup that has significant artistic value
    • Product packaging, including book covers, would not count as art
    • You cannot make photographs of non-plastic art (paintings, drawings etc.) since a copy of a picture could reduce the value of the original.
    • A picture of a crowded shop window or market stall is probably o.k. though on the basis of COM:De minimis
Just a personal opinion – FOP is a tricky subject. When in doubt, leave it out. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:36, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Public place is not defined; we usually assume a narrower definition (to places like streets and parks) unless we can find some examples from court cases. I would not assume that stores or museums are public places by that law. But yes otherwise, there is no "permanent" provision, so it would seem as though most anything is fair game there. Carl Lindberg (talk) 13:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Aymatth2: Thanks a lot! You do not think that photographic works could include photos displayed on product packaging or books? So if a product packaging or a bookcover is mainly a photo then it would be a photographic work?
  • No. The intent is to cover a stand-alone photograph hanging on a wall or otherwise exhibited in public, not a photograph embedded in another work. Even if the photograph was clipped out of the image to remove any surrounding text and graphics, that would still be a copyright violation. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:26, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If displayed refer to being "presented" then I think it will conflict with buildings and other architecture because they often have another purpose than being presented. My guess is that they are builded for some purpose but now that they are there and visible then creator try to make them look cool. But I'm not sure what difference it makes because if it is visible in a public place and is placed there on purpose. I agree that if someone make a work of art and place it in a non public place then I can't just move it outside on the street and take a photo and then claim its FOP.
  • Buildings are certainly o.k., and works in permanent or temporary outdoor displays. But a chair unloaded from a truck and standing on the sidewalk before being moved into the shop would not count. And as Clindberg says, there is doubt about whether any indoor place is considered public, even a government-owned free admission museum. The law does not define "public place", so we tend to take the narrowest interpretation. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:31, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Clindberg: Thank you too! As for public place what about a festival with 50,000 ppl where you have to pay 10 $ to enter? Is that not public place? In some roads and bridges you have to pay to use them but I would still call it a public place. If I knock on your door and pay 5 $ to use your toilet I would not call it a public place. So I agree we have to draw the line somewhere.
When the law does not specify indoor or outdoor then could we not assume that it covers both? --MGA73 (talk) 14:35, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would not assume indoors, or places you pay to enter. "Public place" often means just publicly-owned streets, parks, and that sort of thing. It rarely includes indoor spaces. This is also a translated law; there could be subtleties in the original Vietnamese text as well. If we can find other uses of "public place" in their laws or court decisions, that could help. But without those, I would limit it to outdoor streets and similar settings. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:31, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @MGA73: I just discovered that Article 25.1(h) is restricted by Article 25.2 and 25.3 that I quote from [1]:
    • 2. Organizations and individuals who use the works stipulated in clause 1 of this article must neither affect the normal use of such works nor cause prejudice to the rights of the author or copyright holder, and must provide information being the author's name and the source and origin of the work.
    • 3. The use of works in the cases stipulated in clause 1 of this article shall not apply to architectural works, plastic works and computer programs.
    Article 25.2 seems to be a fair-use restriction and Article 25.3 hinders all FoP possibilities for architectural works (including buildings) by Article 25.1(h). The 2009 amended version can be found at [2]. The amended version reads:
    • 2. Organizations and individuals that use works defined in Clause 1 of this Article may neither affect the normal utilization of these works nor prejudice the rights of the authors or copyright holders; and shall indicate the authors" names, and sources and origins of these works.
    • 3. The provisions of Points a and e. Clause 1 of this Article are not applicable to architectural works, plastic works and computer programs.
    So 25.1(h) is no longer under the effect of 25.3. However I still has some doubts on the restrictions stated in 25.2. Buiquangtu (talk) 00:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Buiquangtu: Hi! I agree that 25.1(h) is no longer affected by 25.3. It was probably just a mistake in the original text. About 25.2 the author have to be mentioned if the author is known. I do not know how to handle that. One way is to forbid all use where the author is not mentioned. Another way is to say that if the author have not written his/her name visible on the work, then he/she have indicated that he/she does not want to be attributed for the work. As a minimum I think photographer/uploader should look for signs on the work to see if author is mentioned. --MGA73 (talk) 08:00, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aymatth2 The current text at Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Vietnam#Freedom_of_panorama mention "ceramics". Can we conclude that from the law? Do you think that include 1) vi:Tập tin:Gom Bat Trang-Hu co nap.jpg and/or 2) vi:Tập tin:Tranh gốm Bến Dược (full).jpg? --MGA73 (talk) 17:35, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Aymatth2. w:en:Plastic Arts mention ceramics and that shows this photo File:Tile panel flowers Louvre OA3919-2-297.jpg of a tile. So I was not sure if plastic arts ONLY cover things made of plastic or it could include ceramics too. I guess that it could include ceramics but we can't be 100 % sure unless we have a court verdict saying yes or no :-D --MGA73 (talk) 17:08, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Plastic" comes from the Greek word plastos, meaning molded. Two hundred years ago "plastic art" referred to sculptures or other objects of wood, stone, glass, metal or clay. "Plastic art" does not refer only to objects made of modern synthetic materials. It refers to any objects that are molded, carved, shaped etc., basically any 3D works. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Something updated in their law as per COM:VP#Updated copyright law of Vietnam and no more FOP?. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Old photographs

[edit]

I found some old photos on vi.wiki for example vi:Tập tin:Cửu vị thần công 3.jpg and vi:Tập tin:Đàn xã tắc triều Nguyễn (1914).jpg. They are from before 1917 so they should be PD-in the US.

Template:PD-Vietnam says "...photographic work, work of applied art or anonymous work first published more than 75 years ago."

Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Vietnam#General_rules says "...photographic works, works of applied art and anonymous works where the author remains unknown have a term of protection of 75 years from the date of first publication"

But is also says "...photographic works and works of applied art which remain unpublished within 25 years from the date of fixation, the term of protection is 100 years from the date of fixation".

First question is if "photographic works" include all photos or some photos are just "simple photos". Since I do not see any mentioning of that I would assume the rules are the same for all photos.

Second question is what "fixation" date is. Is that the date it is created?

Third question is if photos made by a known photographer are protected PMA + 50 because of "b" or if it is covered by "a" making "b" irrelevant.

I @Aymatth2 and Clindberg: that have commented on Vietnamese law earlier. --MGA73 (talk) 17:01, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • My view:
    • The template is wrong, and should be fixed to match this page
    • The concept of "simple photo" is not mentioned in the law, so the same rules apply to all photos
    • Fixation date is an obsolete term that refers to the date that the photograph was transferred from plate or film to paper. Safest is to take it as the date the photo was created.
    • The photo goes into public domain:
      • If published but author(s) not known, 75 years from date of publication
      • If unpublished within 25 years of creation, 100 years from creation
      • Otherwise, 50 years after last author died
Aymatth2 (talk) 19:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes Aymatth2 that's right. Once when we took photos it could take a long time before we got them printed on paper :-)
Thanks a lot! I was really wondering what fixation was.
If I remember correct then {{PD-old-assumed}} says 120 years because it uses PDM+70. So if a country has PDM+50 then what about saying that files older than 100 years should be safe? They are PD in the US and PD in Vietnam if photographer is unknown. So they are only copyrighted if author can be found and he/she lived more than 50 years after the photo was taken.
Or should we also take in account the nationality of the photographer and where the user that uploaded the file to the servers was located at the time of upload per Commons:Licensing#Interaction_of_US_and_non-US_copyright_law? --MGA73 (talk) 21:01, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think we generally consider the laws of the US and the laws of the country where the work was first published, or the laws of the author's country of origin if it was not published. That may not be technically exactly right, but should be safe enough. {{PD-old-assumed}} is a bit controversial. I doubt you would find any support for an assumed 100 year term in countries with life+50 terms. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Aymatth2: thank you. You are right {{PD-old-assumed}} is a bit controversial. I was just thinking that if 120 years is okay for life+70 then simple math should mean that "life+70 minus life+50 = 20" and "120 minus 20 = 100" :-) --MGA73 (talk) 09:18, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Aymatth2: I forgot about this discussion but today I needed it again. It is not just the template that is a problem because Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Vietnam#Copyright_tags says:
"{{PD-Vietnam}} – all photographs enter the public domain fifty years after they were first published, and all non-photographic works enter the public domain fifty years after the death of the creator."
Perhaps Carl Lindberg would help us once more and give us some comments before we change the page/template? --MGA73 (talk) 07:15, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that there was a discussion on vi:Thảo_luận_Bản_mẫu:PVCC-Việt_Nam about the law. It was said that the law does not change copyright for files allready PD. So therefore photos before 1959 are PD. --MGA73 (talk) 12:21, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's right. Anonymous works published before 1960 are PD in Vietnam because their copyright were expired after 1st, January, 2010 (according to Law on intellectual property 2005) and their copyright are not extended according to Decree 85/2011/ND-CP. ~ Ultraviolet (talk2me) ~ 05:22, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aymatth2 and Clindberg: sorry to bother you again. And thank you Ultraviolet.

Article 220 in law No. 50/2005/QH11 say: "1. Copyright and related rights protected under the legal documents effective before the effective date of this Law shall continue to be protected under this Law if they remain in term of protection on that date." (that is July 1, 2006).

Article 30 in law No. 36/2009/QH12 say: "1. Copyright and related rights protected under legal documents which took effect before the effective date of this Law continue to be protected under this Law if they remain in the term of protection by that date." (that is January 1, 2010)

I'm not a native English speaker but I read it as it only protects works/photos that was copyrighted when the law came into effext.

As an example of a photo deleted because new rules was applied to old photos Commons:Deletion requests/File:General Staff in Battle of Dien Bien Phu.jpeg. Perhaps we can make things more clear? --MGA73 (talk) 05:53, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aymatth2: The previous laws include Ordinance No. 38-L/CTN1 of December 02, 1994, on protection of copyright (see Article 17, 18, 19, 20, 21) and Civil Code, October 28, 1995 (see Article 766). Tranminh360 (talk) 06:16, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Aymatth2: According to this Resolution: 1- Bộ luật dân sự của nước Cộng hoà xã hội chủ nghĩa Việt Nam được Quốc hội thông qua ngày 28 tháng 10 năm 1995 có hiệu lực từ ngày 1 tháng 7 năm 1996. (1. The Civil Code of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam passed by the National Assembly on October 28, 1995 takes effect from 1 July 1996). 2- Các pháp lệnh sau đây hết hiệu lực kể từ ngày 1 tháng 7 năm 1996: ... Pháp lệnh bảo hộ quyền tác giả ngày 2 tháng 12 năm 1994; (2. The following ordinances cease to be effective as of July 1, 1996: ... Ordinance on Copyright Protection of December 2, 1994). So the Civil Code 1995 replaced Ordinance No. 38-L/CTN1. The Civil Code 1995 was replaced by Law No. 33/2005/QH11 of June 14, 2005 to promulgate The Civil Code, and the Civil Code 2005 was replaced by Law No. 91/2015/QH13 dated November 24, 2015, The Civil Code. Tranminh360 (talk) 03:50, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Aymatth2: thank you very much! I will ping @Violetbonmua: Can you help us with a link? Also ping @Buiquangtu: that may be interessted in this discussion. --MGA73 (talk) 13:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Buiquangtu: that may be true but I think that sometimes we need to know when a photo is PD in Vietnam to find out if it is PD in the US. --MGA73 (talk) 10:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Link to Law No. 50/2005/QH11, Law No. 36/2009/QH12. After that, they issued some subsidiary legislations guiding the IP Law, which can be summarized in this short article. I hope this can help. ~ Ultraviolet (talk2me) ~ 05:30, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Violetbonmua: Thank you. What we were looking for was the law that was in effect before the changes you mention. Something that document that photos were PD after 50 years before 2005. --MGA73 (talk) 09:20, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's written in Law No. 50/2005/QH11 (as far as I know, this is the first IP Law in Vietnam): Article 27. Term of copyright protection: "Cinematographic works, photographic works, stage works, applied art works and anonymous works shall have a term of protection of fifty (50) years as from the date of first publication." The new Law went into effect in 2010, changed 50 years to 75 years but it was not retroactive to works already in the public domain (anonymous works that was published before 1960). ~ Ultraviolet (talk2me) ~ 09:32, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Violetbonmua: Thank you. I think the last paragraph of "General rules" covers that. "Therefore, cinematographic works, photographic works, dramatic works, works of applied art and anonymous works that were published 50 years or more prior to January 1, 2010 are still in the public domain." Aymatth2 (talk) 12:27, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Aymatth2: Okay so it seems that both Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Vietnam#General_rules and {{PD-Vietnam}} say that photos before 2010-50=1960 are PD according to Vietnamese law.
But what about URAA (23 December 1998)? Can we make a simple text here on the talk page saying when photos are free in the US? --MGA73 (talk) 13:10, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is a link to Commons:URAA-restored copyrights in the infobox and a note below it saying "A work is usually protected in the US if it is a type of work copyrightable in the US, published after 1924 and protected in the country of origin on the URAA date" Aymatth2 (talk) 13:55, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Aymatth2: yes I agree but many users will have no clue what that means. Would it be too simple to say 1998 minus 50 = 1948 so all photos taken before 23 December 1948 are not restored by URAA and therefore PD in the US? At least here on talk page. I know it does not fit the system we use on the project page. --MGA73 (talk) 15:13, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to clarify that on the project page. Maybe anyone watching this page can check if the the wording makes sense. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:47, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"We may assume the 50-year term applied on the URAA date, so works published before 23 December 1948 where the author remains unknown, and works by authors who died before 23 December 1948, are in the public domain in the United States."

Documents

[edit]

On Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:PD Vietnam Government and Template talk:PD-VietnamGov there were some discussion about documents.

The copyright law, Article 15, Clause 2, say that "Legal documents, administrative documents and other documents in the judicial domain and official translations of these documents" are not subject to copyright protection. And a later document specify that administrative documents "include documents issued by state agencies, political organizations, socio-political organizations, socio-political-professional organizations, social organizations, socio-professional organizations, and people’s armed forces units."

The template {{PD-VietnamGov}} say "Warning: The template is for images of scanned text documents only.".

I see no reason why "documents" should only include text. If a document include a logo or a graph or a photo then why would that not be PD?

Also I do not think that {{PD-VietnamGov}} is the best copyright tag for such documents because "social organizations" would not be a part of the government? {{PD-Vietnam-exempt}} would be better provided of course that there are any non-government works that is PD.

For example what about files Category:Emblems of provinces and territories of Vietnam? Would you say that emblems could be found on any of the relevant documents?

Ping to inform users that discussed this topic earlier: @Martin H., Dokientrung, Tranminh360, Jameslwoodward, Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy, Donald Trung, Kei, Emperofvietilia, Antemister, Grenouille vert, Fry1989, Illegitimate Barrister, Emperofvietilia, Odysseus1479, Jackycheung0929, Roy17, and Sanandros: (sorry if you do not wish to comment here then just ignore please). --MGA73 (talk) 17:19, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need someone who can read the text of the law in Vietnamese. In American English, "Documents" would include a paper with text that had a logo on it, but not the logo by itself. I am by no means anything like an expert or even knowledgeable about Vietnam, but I would be inclined to believe that most "social organizations' are in fact arms of the government. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:21, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Jameslwoodward: Yes you are right that it would be good to have someone that speaks Vietnamese comment. I checked en:Document and it says that "In the computer age, "document" usually denotes a primarily textual computer file, including its structure and format, e.g. fonts, colors, and images." (I of course notice the word "images")
Personally I would also call reports for a document and if I check Category:Documents and subcategories I find big reports too. For example: File:Desert quartzite solar project - draft plan amendment, environmental impact statement, environmental impact report (IA desertquartzites00unse).pdf that has 1,130 pages :-) But lets see if someone can help with a more qualified opinion than mine. --MGA73 (talk) 21:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Law No. 80/2015/QH13 dated June 22, 2015, promulgation of legislative documents: Article 4. The system of legislative documents

  1. The Constitution.
  2. Codes and Laws (hereinafter referred to as Laws), Resolutions of the National Assembly
  3. Ordinances, Resolutions of Standing Committee of the National Assembly; Joint Resolutions between Standing Committee of the National Assembly and Management Board of Central Committee of Vietnamese Fatherland Front
  4. Orders, Decisions of the President.
  5. Decrees of the Government; Joint Resolutions between the Government and Management Board of Central Committee of Vietnamese Fatherland Front
  6. Decision of the Prime Minister.
  7. Resolutions of Judge Council of the People’s Supreme Court.
  8. Circulars of executive judge of the People’s Supreme Court; Circulars of the Chief Procurator of the Supreme People’s Procuracy; Circulars of Ministers, Heads of ministerial agencies; Joint Circulars between executive judge of the People’s Supreme Court and the Chief Procurator of the Supreme People’s Procuracy; Joint Circulars between Ministers, Heads of ministerial agencies and executive judge of the People’s Supreme Court, the Chief Procurator of the Supreme People’s Procuracy; Decisions of State Auditor General.
  9. Resolutions of the People’s Councils of central-affiliated cities and provinces (hereinafter referred to as provinces).
  10. Decisions of the People’s Committees of provinces.
  11. Legislative documents of local governments in administrative - economic units.
  12. Resolutions of the People’s Councils of districts, towns and cities within provinces (hereinafter referred to as districts).
  13. Decisions of the People’s Committees of districts.
  14. Resolutions of the People’s Councils of communes, wards and towns within districts (hereinafter referred to as communes).
  15. Decisions of the People’s Committees of communes.

Law No. 63/2020/QH14 dated June 18, 2020 Amendments to the Law on Promulgation of Legislative Documents:

1. Some Clauses of Article 4 are amended as follows:

c) Clause 3 is amended as follows:

“3. Ordinances, Resolutions of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly; Joint Resolutions between the Standing Committee of the National Assembly and the Management Board of Central Committee of Vietnamese Fatherland Front; Joint Resolutions between the Standing Committee of the National Assembly, the Government, the Management Board of Central Committee of Vietnamese Fatherland Front.”;

b) Clause 8 is amended as follows and Clause 8a is added after Clause 8 as follows:

“8. Circulars of the Executive Judge of the People’s Supreme Court; Circulars of the Chief Procurator of the Supreme People’s Procuracy; Circulars of Ministers, Heads of ministerial agencies; Decisions of the State Auditor General.

8a. Joint Circulars between the Executive Judge of the People’s Supreme Court, the Chief Procurator of the Supreme People’s Procuracy, the State Auditor General, Ministers, Heads of ministerial agencies. Joint Circulars between Ministers and Heads of ministerial agencies shall not be promulgated.”.

Tranminh360 (talk) 02:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About administrative documents (văn bản hành chính), see Decree No. 30/2020/NĐ-CP (in Vietnamese):

Điều 7. Các loại văn bản hành chính

Văn bản hành chính gồm các loại văn bản sau: Nghị quyết (cá biệt), quyết định (cá biệt), chỉ thị, quy chế, quy định, thông cáo, thông báo, hướng dẫn, chương trình, kế hoạch, phương án, đề án, dự án, báo cáo, biên bản, tờ trình, hợp đồng, công văn, công điện, bản ghi nhớ, bản thỏa thuận, giấy ủy quyền, giấy mời, giấy giới thiệu, giấy nghỉ phép, phiếu gửi, phiếu chuyển, phiếu báo, thư công.

Điều 8. Thể thức văn bản

1. Thể thức văn bản là tập hợp các thành phần cấu thành văn bản, bao gồm những thành phần chính áp dụng đối với tất cả các loại văn bản và các thành phần bổ sung trong những trường hợp cụ thể hoặc đối với một số loại văn bản nhất định.

2. Thể thức văn bản hành chính bao gồm các thành phần chính

a) Quốc hiệu và Tiêu ngữ.

b) Tên cơ quan, tổ chức ban hành văn bản.

c) Số, ký hiệu của văn bản.

d) Địa danh và thời gian ban hành văn bản.

đ) Tên loại và trích yếu nội dung văn bản.

e) Nội dung văn bản.

g) Chức vụ, họ tên và chữ ký của người có thẩm quyền.

h) Dấu, chữ ký số của cơ quan, tổ chức.

i) Nơi nhận.

3. Ngoài các thành phần quy định tại khoản 2 Điều này, văn bản có thể bổ sung các thành phần khác

a) Phụ lục.

b) Dấu chỉ độ mật, mức độ khẩn, các chỉ dẫn về phạm vi lưu hành.

c) Ký hiệu người soạn thảo văn bản và số lượng bản phát hành.

d) Địa chỉ cơ quan, tổ chức; thư điện tử; trang thông tin điện tử; số điện thoại; số Fax.

4. Thể thức văn bản hành chính được thực hiện theo quy định tại Phụ lục I Nghị định này.

See also Annex I and Annex III of this Decree. Sorry I don't find English translation of this Decree. Tranminh360 (talk) 03:31, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In Vietnam, legal documents and administrative documents usually include seals, not logos. For example, Decision No. 07/2021/QĐ-TTg has a seal of the Prime Minister at the end of document; Decree No. 16/2021/NĐ-CP has a seal of the Government at the end of document. Tranminh360 (talk) 02:19, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Tranminh360: Thank you. Yes it seems that the meaning of documents is meant in a narrow way.
Also Violetbonmua told on vi.wiki that "The word "document" can be translated into Vietnamese in many different way. But when it's "văn bản", it means "text document". When it's "tài liệu", it means more (text, map, picture,...)." So since the word used here is "văn bản" then the meaning is text documents. --MGA73 (talk) 16:01, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think logos in Category:PNG - Emblems of provinces and territories of Vietnam appear in any legal documents or administrative documents. For example, Decision No. 04/2021/QĐ-UBND by the People's Committee of Camau Province includes the seal of the People's Committee of Camau Province, the text in the seal is "Ủy ban Nhân dân tỉnh Cà Mau". It doesn't include File:Emblem of Camau Province.png. See also Decree No. 99/2016/ND-CP on management and use of seals (English translation). Tranminh360 (talk) 02:39, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Something is not clear in the English translation. "Văn bản" in Vietnamese have a narrow meaning than "document", see here and here for example. The first meaning in these dictionary is always "writing", second is "text". I've been reading Vietnamese "văn bản" for more than a decade (see list of legislative documents in Vietnam showed above), and I've never seen any logos or images showed in "văn bản", except for the national emblem. So, according to Vietnamese Law, only legal text documents is in the PD in Vietnam. ~ Ultraviolet (talk2me) ~ 17:47, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stamps

[edit]

Does anyone know what the copyright status for stamps of Vietnam is? For some reason I thought they were PD, but apparently the guideline doesn't say anything about them. In the meantime it looks like most images of stamps from this country are have a self cc-by-sa-4.0 license, which doesn't seem right. I guess there's PD-VietnamGov. Although the wording of Template:PD-VietnamGov makes it sound like it wouldn't apply to stamps. Especially since it doesn't cover coats of arms and flags. Adamant1 (talk) 05:49, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons_talk:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Vietnam&oldid=764684328"