Robin Schwab wrote:
Cary Bass schrieb:
people, believe it or not). There are other possible reasons that are good faith rationale. We should make every attempt to address their concerns of course, and explain that if something has already been reused there's nothing we can do about it on that end, but we should be willing to remove their media in order to maintain good relations, which has a great potential to spread and evangelize to our free media culture in the future.
I think this is a good thought. We have so few to give why not give the users a right to delete their own images? Just because you can't revoke a license that does not /force/ us to keep and display the images forever.
Currently the situation seems unfair to me: The contributor has to give an irrevocable license but he does not get the right that we keep his images. Specially when you send a OTRS request this affronts potential contributors.
One of our selling points is that people can reuse our images with confidence that they will continue to be freely licensed. If uploaders can start randomly pulling images, perhaps for no deeper reason that their beloved image isn't the featured picture in an article or whatever, it does not give any confidence to reusers that they won't be gone after as well; for one thing, the statement of license is on commons, and itself disappears when the image is deleted.
We need uploaders to make a commitment that the material will be free in perpetuity. If an uploader isn't willing to make that commitment, then the supposed free license is meaningless, and the image might as well be proprietary - I don't want that kind of material and I don't want that kind of contributor participating, ever.
Stan