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.
While Milne’s 1926 book is in the public domain, later changes to Winnie-the-Pooh is not. Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh did not wear a red shirt. The red shirt was by a completely different author. The later version is the one that Disney acquired the rights to in 1961. Thus this image is potentially a derivative work of Disneys Winnie the Pooh Trade (talk) 13:40, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why I got pinged here, but I have a feeling that I know. So, FWIW, DALL-E just gives you a generic kaiju thing when you ask for "Godzilla", the only specificity being that it is bipedal, reptillian-ish, and a bit spikey, with teeth, being more a derivative work of the 19th century depictions of Megalosaurus than of the Japanese monster. It would be interesting to see how it reacts to prompts which seriously attempt to produce clear derivative works of copyrighted characters, since Godzilla is an easy one to dodge, as the basic body style of the creature is based on 19th century depictions of extinct theropods.
However, I'd agree that this image here seems to be crossing the line into a clear derivative work, with the colours, head shape, and basically everything mirroring the Disney owned character very closely indeed. Evidently, some of these AI algorithms are less copyright-conscious than others. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 14:14, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise we would need to change the description in the wikis that use it since they call the image AI generated Trade (talk) 15:52, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But that wouldn't affect the DR here. My question is, would its deletion status (which hinges on it being a DW of Disney's Pooh) be affected (either way) by it being AI or not? There is a claim made (on no solid basis) that "copyright no longer applies to anything that AI has touched" (and thus it could be kept). There are also editors here who hold that all AI uploads should be deleted and their uploaders banned (and so, delet). I don't support either of these, but are you suggesting that AI here does imply one of them? Andy Dingley (talk) 16:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, clearly, the AI used a copyrighted work to produce this. If it didn't, it would resemble the A.A Milne character, and wouldn't have the combination of shirt colour, head shape, body colour etc. I'd say that this image does raise questions about how copyright sensitive Midjourney is. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 10:36, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, A photograph of Paddington Bear giving Batman a marmalade sandwich this is what DALL-E gives you when you try to force it to produce a DW. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 12:00, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This would pass US fair use and parody laws. As such it's usable on en:WP. However it's not sufficiently free to host here on Commons. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:38, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment While the concept of a "yellow version of Xi Jinping wearing red t-shirt" can't be copyrighted, this particular depiction is clearly a derivative work of a Disney work. Di (they-them) (talk) 17:56, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And what is the threshold of something simply being a yellow thing with red T-shirt and something being a derivative work of Winnie the Pooh? Certainly it was inspired, but that is not necessary to be considered a derivative work (I am quite sure there are some precedents here on Commmons). RodRabelo7 (talk) 18:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It seems that this image is obviously derivative of Disney's copyrighted depictions of Winnie-the-Pooh. It can probably be undeleted in uh... 2062? At that far away I don't know if it's even worth setting to be undeleted lol. Di (they-them) (talk) 17:56, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just the shirt, it's the head shape, body shape and colour, ears, cheeks etc. There is no non-copyrighted way to depict the claimed similarity between Xi and Winnie, because the similarity is not present in the pre-Disney Winnie. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 10:40, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Read Commons:Fan art; fan art is not automatically banned. The concept of a yellow bear has been done several times before. Animals wearing only a shirt with no pants has been done so many times there are multiple TVTropes pages about it. [1][2] So is a yellow bear wearing a red shirt copyrighted? According to the policy on fan art, Where the work of fiction makes use of commonplace pre-existing elements, taking one of those elements and imaginatively recreating it as an original work of fan art does not infringe any copyright, even if the recreation would clearly be understood to relate to the fictional universe created by the original author. It's difficult to believe that in a world where cartoon bears only wear shirts and nothing else, that Disney has a copyright on a sixth of rainbow. One could argue the ears, nose, and eyebrows are copyrighted, but the entire reason why Xi Jinping has been memed like this is because his nose and eyebrows are said to be similar to Winnie the Pooh. Chess (User talk:Chess) Please ping when replying. 00:08, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Except that the intent here was explicitly to create a derivative work, by making a Xi-Winnie hybrid. Also, this doesn't just take one element, it takes multiple ones, it is a yellow bear with a red shirt, with the same head shape, ears, and basically everything. The eyebrows and nose aren't even part of it here. If you can recognise that it is based on the Disney WtP then that's enough for it to be a DW, even if the individual components had already been used elsewhere. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 12:43, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't think that the rationale by Chess is convincing and rather agree with Andy Dingley. As also indicated by the file name, this is not a random "yellow bear with a red shirt", but specifically based on Disney's copyrighted appearance of Winnie the Pooh; the whole "Xinnie the Pooh" joke/meme wouldn't work otherwise. I think it as an example of fair use, but fair use isn't accepted on Commons. The image can be locally hosted and used in English Wikipedia and other projects that allow fair use. Gestumblindi (talk) 17:30, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This would pass US fair use and parody laws. As such it's usable on en:WP. However it's not sufficiently free to host here on Commons. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:38, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Strong keep. A yellow version of Xi Jinping wearing red T-shirt cannot be copyrighted. Per COM:TOO. RodRabelo7 (talk) 15:55, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Comment While the concept of a "yellow version of Xi Jinping wearing red t-shirt" can't be copyrighted, this particular depiction is clearly a derivative work of a Disney work. Di (they-them) (talk) 17:56, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Neutral.