On 6 June 2011 08:35, Pedro Sanchez <pdsanchez@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Rama Neko <ramaneko@gmail.com> wrote:
> For the "Show respect" thing, I'd go as far as saying something to the
> effect of
> "do not photograph if it is not allowed, do not use you flash, do not
> attempt in any way to 'steal' photographs, as the quality will be poor
> and the short-term thrill and benefits are vastly exceeded by the
> long-term grudge and lack of confidence that the institution will hold
> towards us".
> -- Rama

I disagree on two accounts.

First, it's an usage guide. It assumes you already have the PD work
available for use, so the photograph point is moot.

Second, even if it were referring to the process of obtaining (not
using), many places impose groundless restrictions (as if they owned
copyright, and every use of the work had to be approved by them).
Supporting this position implicitly says we agree that a PD work is
not actually available.

The current form is indeed good. It's about how-to-use PD content,
showing respect
* Don't imply you use is endorsed. (It may or may not, but don't imply it)
* Point out any modification (so it doesn't get confused with the
original work)
* Properly label the credits for any modification

All about general and desirable conditions on how to use, not how you
get the PD content.

Pedro Sánchez

I agree with what Pedro has said here. This proposed guideline on Commons is about how we should treat the digital objects that have been donated to Commons - not about how to obtain more. Rama - what you have said is true and I agree with the principles you've listed, but perhaps http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Guide_to_content_partnerships is a better place to put that kind of advice.