Content deleted Content added
=Jimbo sez= query |
Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Wikipedia talk:File copyright tags/Archive 10) (bot Tag: Manual revert |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header|search=yes|WP:ICT}} |
|||
==Follow-up on Watchlist== |
|||
{{Notice|Please direct questions related to tagging of specific images to [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions]] where you are more likely to get a timely response. This page is focused on more general discussion about Wikipedia's many copyright tag templates.}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Images and Media}} |
|||
Impressive marathon tagging effort! Logical next step? Include some form of boilerplate instructions at the top of [[Special:Watchlist]] so that User knows what to do with all the <nowiki>[[Image:...]]</nowiki> files that have suddenly sprung up – instructions at the very least for indicating that User took the photo last year on his/her holidays and User does license it under the GFDL. Doable? [[User:Hajor|–''Hajor'']] 00:22, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|||
|archiveheader = |
|||
==Big problem?== |
|||
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|||
I just realized a potentially big problem with marking these images. When the image is replaced, the image description doesn't change. [[User:Anthony DiPierro|Anthony DiPierro]] 18:22, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
|counter = 10 |
|||
|minthreadsleft = 0 |
|||
: The uploader is already (A) warned and (B) instructed to update the text. Is this sufficient? [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 18:29, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|||
|algo = old(60d) |
|||
:I guess...Though somehow I doubt most uploaders are going to follow those instruction/warnings. [[User:Anthony DiPierro|Anthony DiPierro]] 18:32, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
|archive = Wikipedia talk:File copyright tags/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
}} |
|||
----------------- |
|||
I've tagged every "large" (over 300kb) image. --[[User:Imran|Imran]] 19:08, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
----------------- |
|||
==CopyrightedFreeUse== |
|||
What is the msg:CopyrightedFreeUse supposed to be used for? Would the GPL apply? If not, can we make a tag for free non-GFDL licenses? [[User:Anthony DiPierro|Anthony DiPierro]] 14:53, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:I think so. --[[User:Imran|Imran]] 15:23, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)~ |
|||
::We need to clarify the message then. When I tried to add the tag to [[:Image:Info_bulb.png]] I got reverted by Eloquence who said: "wtf? gpl!=any use" |
|||
[[User:Anthony DiPierro|Anthony DiPierro]] 15:37, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:::GPL is any use. It contains no restrictions as to who can use it or for what purpose. --[[User:Imran|Imran]] 18:23, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
::::That's not true. It has a copyleft requirement and an author credit requirement.[[User:Eloquence|—Eloquence]] 19:22, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:::::The two aren't mutually exclusive, to use the image you have to meet certain conditions (credit, licencing) but you can use it for any purpose you want. The conditions don't limit the purpose (as for example fair use conditions do) so it classifies as "any use". --[[User:Imran|Imran]] 19:28, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
::::::This is your interpretation. The phrase "for any purpose" is too vague to be a good characterization of the GPL. It must not be used on GPL licensed content.[[User:Eloquence|—Eloquence]] |
|||
::::::: To quote what it actually defined as "where anyone is allowed to use an image", which clearly is covered by GPL by anyones interpretation. Also note that the primary point is to distinguish these from licences which prohibit commercial exploitation. --[[User:Imran|Imran]] 13:17, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Now that we have a tag for GPL the point is somewhat mooted. However, we should probably consider rewording this for the future. Maybe a good start would be what falls under this which doesn't fall under any other category? Then we can build a definition around that. [[User:Anthony DiPierro|Anthony DiPierro]] 14:34, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
::::::: Btw, I discussed this matter at [[Wikipedia talk:Pictures from southwarkphotolibrary.co.uk details]] with Secretlondon, and we vaguelly agreed to blitz "CopyrightedFreeUse" as too vague anyway. Wander over there, read, opine, etc. [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 23:07, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:::::: "CopyrightedFreeUse" IS too vague. The question of interest is whether a given image is compatible with the GFDL. I.e. can it be distributed under the GFDL, which is only possible if it has a licence that grants all of the permissions of the GFDL. It the licence doesn't explicity grant permission to perform any particular act (e.g., making copies or creating derived works), then under copyright law you don't (unless in case of fair use) have permission. Remember that the image copyright is not the only thing that can be violated: if an image can't be used under the full terms of the GFDL, then adding the image to Wikipedia violates the licence of every contributer of text (since they have given only GFDL permissions, which only permits combining the work with other GFDL material. If it wasn't intended to work this way, Wikipedia would have chosen a less restrictive licence). I suggest an alternative tag "GFDL-Compatible". [[User:Goatherd|Goatherd]] 19:25, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
: It would make sense to have some or all of: |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:GPL]] (perhaps link to [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/GPL/2.0/] too) |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:LGPL]] (perhaps link to [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/LGPL/2.1/] too) |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-by]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-by-nd]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-by-nd-nc]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-by-nc]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-by-nc-sa]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-by-sa]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-nd]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-nd-nc]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-nc]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-nc-sa]] |
|||
:* [[MediaWiki:cc-sa]] |
|||
: The various CC licenses should include the appropriate machine-readable meta-data too. I don't think mediawiki supports <a rel="license"> tags, but the RDF tags should work. [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 15:39, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
I'd say we don't need some of those cc licenses: |
|||
*No derivatives allowed! |
|||
** [[MediaWiki:cc-by-nd]] |
|||
** [[MediaWiki:cc-by-nd-nc]] |
|||
** [[MediaWiki:cc-nd]] |
|||
** [[MediaWiki:cc-nd-nc]] |
|||
*No commercial use allowed: |
|||
** [[MediaWiki:cc-by-nc]] |
|||
** [[MediaWiki:cc-by-nc-sa]] |
|||
** [[MediaWiki:cc-nc]] |
|||
** [[MediaWiki:cc-nc-sa]] |
|||
--[[User:Anthony DiPierro|Anthony DiPierro]] |
|||
: Hmm, perhaps. I'll concentrate on the freer ones. Nevertheless, we do have images that are for non-commercial use only (hence [[MediaWiki:noncommercial]]), and we do have images that do not allow derivative works (various crown copyrights, for example). So I don't think these would be particularly worse than others. Also, peeople may wish to ''additionally'' license under some of these CC licenses. Also, I'm not sure to what extent cc-by-nc and cc-nc are viral - it may be that they don't prevent derivate commercial works. I'd have to check. |
|||
: As one example, [[:Image:SOHO solar flare sun MPEG 20031026 eit 304.mpeg]] is effectively ''cc-by-nc''. [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 15:52, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:OK...You make good points. I guess it's OK to have these licenses, but the non-free ones (listed above) should only be used as additional licenses or in cases where "fair use" is acceptable. [[User:Anthony DiPierro|Anthony DiPierro]] 20:15, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
== Public domain == |
|||
:: ''FYI: email I just sent to Creative Commons'' |
|||
Hi. |
|||
I'm working on Wikipedia, where we're trying to get to grips with our huge array of images, and working on tagging them appropriately, both in human-readable and machine-readable forms. You can see how we're doing at: |
|||
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags |
|||
One problem we've run into is for public domain images: both images that have fallen into the public domain, and images that have been explicitly dedicated to the public domain. |
|||
Your site is clear enough about what I should do if I personally want to certify or dedicate an image to the public domain. However, I face the situation where *someone else* is claiming that an image is public domain. Should I direct them to use your "Public Domain Dedication" service? |
|||
My second question is for metadata: What metadata should I use to indicate that: |
|||
* An image is certified public domain. |
|||
* An image is dedicated to the public domain. |
|||
* The image is believed to be public domain, but it hasn't been formally certified as such (IE, disclaiming any warranty in case of errors). |
|||
Your site won't display the meta-data unless I personally dedicate something to the public domain, and it's not clear if I need different metadata for the three categories above. |
|||
Thanks, |
|||
-Martin |
|||
: I got a response - need to act now :) [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 01:03, 4 May 2004 (UTC) |
|||
==Tag formats== |
|||
Does anyone have any objections to my changing the format of the CC tags so that they read like [[User:Hajor/sandbox|this]]? Basically, a stack with the logo on top, followed by the two lines of text. Looks a bit neater, in my view, but I don't know if CC has specific rules for displaying its licenses. [[User:Hajor|–''Hajor'']] 16:37, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
: Looks fine. Here are the [http://creativecommons.org/technology/web Creative Commons Guidelines] - do read. [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 19:36, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks for the link; duly read. What I want to do appears to be well within their guidelines, so I'll get cracking. [[User:Hajor|–''Hajor'']] 21:10, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
-------------------- |
|||
Could someone come up with some standard text explaining tagging and asking users to do it, so that we can we just copy/paste it to uploader userpages if they aren't marking. --[[User:Imran|Imran]] 02:16, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
: Would it be good to also edit the mediawiki page for the text on the "upload file" special page? Anyone know which one that is? [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 20:49, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|||
::It is [[MediaWiki:Uploadtext]]. I made some changes to it already. Be careful with this - its HTML not wikimarkup, although it gets sent through the wikiparser for display. [[User:Morwen|Morwen]] 20:50, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)~ |
|||
----- |
|||
Could someone indicate on the page what message should accompany a picture taken from a web site of the US government? My belief is that all such material is really put into the public domain, but I'm not positive. [[User:Tempshill|Tempshill]] 21:43, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:This is wrt the ejector seat photo? The front page of that Holloman AF site links to a [http://www.holloman.af.mil/warning.html Privacy & Security] notice, which says, "Information presented on the Holloman Home Page is considered public information and may be distributed or copied. Use of appropriate byline/photo/image credits is requested." Sounds solidly public domain. Personal approach? I'd mark it with {msg:PD} and add additional links to the original PDF and the Privacy & Security notice. And follow a similar strategy for any other images uploaded from US gov & mil sites. [[User:Hajor|–''Hajor'']] 18:49, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
|||
The GFDL-compatibility issue is more complex. Firstly, none of the CC licenses are directly GFDL compatible, secondly, all of them are GFDL compatible in "aggregation" mode. So the issues is one of freeness, not GFDL compatibility. [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 19:53, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:OK, noted. Ordering them by (perceived) freeness was a good idea. [[User:Hajor|–''Hajor'']] 20:11, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
|||
==Fair use== |
|||
Do I have to add every image which is [[fair use]] to the [[Wikipedia:Fair_use]] page? The images I'm uploading are from another web site and I've gotten his permission and am attributing the images to him. But every image that I add in this manner I ''still'' have to add to the Fair Use page? —[[User:Frecklefoot|Frecklefoot]] 22:05, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:What exactly were the terms of his permission? It sounds as if one of the other tags – <nowiki>{{msg:PermissionAndFairUse}}</nowiki>, or a custom one – might fit the bill better. [[User:Hajor|–''Hajor'']] 01:13, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
I didn't see that other one (<nowiki>{{msg:PermissionAndFairUse}}</nowiki>). I think that fits it. That wasn't exactly my question, though. I just wanted to know if I have to list every image I upload to the Fair Use page. I can understand adding it there if the status of the image is in question. But all these images are ''clearly'' fair use plus I've obtained permission from the source. It just seems like a waste of everyone's time to add such images. —[[User:Frecklefoot|Frecklefoot]] 16:04, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
: [[Wikipedia:Fair use]] is proposed, has some support from high-profile Wikipedians (notably Eloquence and Jimbo Wales), but is not yet common practice. Use your best judgement. [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 18:27, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
|||
Which tag should [[:Image:Isaac.jpg]] get? I got permission to use it, so I thought about adding <nowiki>{{msg:PermissionAndFairUse}}, but as it is a photograph from pre-1923, doesn't that make it {{msg:PD-US}}? Do I need a new {{msg:PermissionAndPD-US}} tag? </nowiki>[[User:Angela|Angela]][[user talk:Angela|.]] 23:49, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC) |
|||
If it is PD only in the US, and needs permission here, then add both. [[User:Secretlondon|Secretlondon]] 23:50, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:Thanks. I've done that now. It just doesn't make a lot of sense as it is claiming to be fair use and PD at the same time. [[User:Angela|Angela]][[user talk:Angela|.]] 18:56, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
|||
==French initiative== |
|||
French Wikipedia has just started a similar (perhaps [[Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages|bolder]]) project: [[:fr:Wikipédia:Projet, Chasse aux images]]. On their [[:fr:Modifications récentes|rc]] they are also talking about the ''suppression d'images non décrites'' (ie, deletion of pics without descriptions). [[User:Hajor|–''Hajor'']] 16:48, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:I think that may be a good idea. hopefully, [[MediaWiki:unverified]] will help us find such pics easily. [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 21:47, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
|||
Two completely separate things: |
|||
1) I notice that <nowiki>{{msg:WorldCoin}}</nowiki> is not listed here, probably because it is created before this initiative; also, at [[Wikipedia:MediaWiki custom messages|MediaWiki custom messages]] it is listed under "Sources of articles" while it should be under "Image description namespace". I didn't want to list and move it myself, maybe there is something I don't know. |
|||
2) I have just uploaded two images ([[:Image:500000000000 dinars.jpg|this]] and [[:Image:Tsar Dusan's coin.gif|that]]) for which I couldn't find appropriate tag. I recall seing more images and sites with somewhat similar policies, so I suggest a new message, named perhaps <nowiki>{{msg:SpecificCopyright}}, {{msg:SpecificPermission}} or {{msg:SpecificTerms}}</nowiki>, with contents of, say: |
|||
''This image is copyrighted, and used with permission. Terms of the permission are given below:'' |
|||
Perhaps not very useful, except to identify such images. |
|||
[[User:Nikola Smolenski|Nikola<div style="height:4px;width:24px;background-color:#F00"> </div><div style="height:4px;width:24px;background-color:#00F"> </div><div style="height:4px;width:24px;background-color:#FFF"> </div>]] 04:30, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC) |
|||
== Jimbo sez == |
|||
While Jimbo has said that we should avoid images that are used with permission only, he's also said that we shouldn't go on a mass deletion binge, but proceed slowly and respectfully. During this slow and respectful period, there will be images used with permission on Wikipedia, and it is better that such images are tagged accurately than not tagged at all. Further, some images will be used with permission '''and''' fair use, and in these cases a dual tag will always be appropriate, even years from now. [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 00:26, 4 May 2004 (UTC) |
|||
: "Therefore these images should be deleted" [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-February/010713.html] Having this message available only encourages people to think that using such images is OK, creating legal problems for downstream users and possibly Wikimedia as well. --[[User:Maveric149|mav]] 00:34, 4 May 2004 (UTC) |
|||
[http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-April/012142.html We're not going to do anything radical and sudden and frightening, but |
|||
at some point in the possibly distant future, we hope to have our |
|||
image-tagging sophistication to the point that we'll just delete stuff |
|||
that doesn't suit our needs for freedom and transparency.] - right back at ya. |
|||
Giving people the option promotes clarity, so we can see what we have, and fix any problems. It also aids downstream users, who can clearly see which images are not available for them to use. If you think it's misleading, fix that by editing, not by removing the option. If I see an image that has been uploaded (perhaps months ago) with Wikipedia-specific permission, I want a way to clearly tag it as such - that's what the "used with permission" tag is for. [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] 01:00, 4 May 2004 (UTC) |
|||
:There is no practical way for them do do that when they download and use our database. Do you really think that a downstream user would go through the tens of thousands of images we have in order to figure that out? We should not encourage the use of these type of images absent a way to exclude these images from the backup dump we allow anybody to copy. I'll think of some better wording to act as a caveat next to the message. --mav |
|||
::Images are not included in the backup dump. [[User:Anthony DiPierro|anthony]] [[User:Anthony_DiPierro/warning|(see warning)]] |
|||
:::Then how do other websites use our images? --mav |
|||
::::They have to spider the site. [[User:Angela|Angela]][[user talk:Angela|.]] 02:09, May 4, 2004 (UTC) |
|||
I think it's a good idea to have the tag, if for no other reason than to mark the images for eventual deletion. [[User:Anthony DiPierro|anthony]] [[User:Anthony_DiPierro/warning|(see warning)]] |
|||
Although I agree with not going on deletion rampage any time soon, where is the policy of uploading ''new'' images that are likely to be tagged with a "non-commerical only" tag. I am considering approaching [http://www.galenfrysinger.com/ this guy] who has fantastic photos. He already allows non_commercial_reuse_provided_credit_given. (see http://www.galenfrysinger.com/faq.htm) but I would like to try and get a bit more free-ness for his low-res photos. If this is not possible, should I bother copying and loading under the restricted licence, or is the expectation that the wikipedia website will be made unambigiously GFDL-free soon? [[User:Pcb21|Pete/Pcb21]] [[User_talk:Pcb21|(talk)]] 11:32, 13 May 2004 (UTC) |
|||
==Confused== |
|||
I just read an article on the [[Lunette]] begging for an illustration. Since it came from an esteemed editor and the image seemed to be within my limited abilities and tools, I took some time to make a rough but representative sketch. When I went to upload the sketch I found that things had radically changed in the months since I had last uploaded images. Everything seemed very reasonable and I could understand why those changes were needed but I could not see what to do. Yes, OK place a tag, but which one? All I wanted was to give away my sketch, with no strings attached, as I had done previously for all my sketches ([[Armoire desk]], [[Bureau a gradin]], [[Bureau Mazarin]], [[Pedestal desk]], [[Rolltop desk]], [[Spinet desk]]). This talk page and its original page were very interesting but they were of no help for my problem. At first I thought the logical thing to do would be just to place (how to place it is another question I have not started to figure out) that GNU tag since I have noticed that the Wikipedia content is covered by it. But then I read that you had to identify the creator for this, and I am not willing to reveal my identity. Other tags seemed likely but they were all shot down in the discussion in the talk page. All I want is to give it away so that anybody can do anything with it. What should I do? [[User:AlainV|AlainV]] 06:30, 2004 May 6 (UTC) |
|||
: <nowiki>{{msg:PD}}</nowiki> |
|||
: I hereby place this image in the public domain |
|||
: - <signature> |
|||
Which becomes |
|||
: {{msg:PD}} |
|||
: I hereby place this image in the public domain |
|||
: - <signature> |
|||
: AFAIK, you don't need to identify yourself. Work of an anonymous author, or work of an author known under a pseudonym (which is the case here) could be released under any of the licenses. [[User:Nikola Smolenski|Nikola]] 22:13, 7 May 2004 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 01:09, 16 December 2023
![]() | Images and Media (inactive) | |||
|