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