Send Gendergap mailing list submissions to
gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
gendergap-request@lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
gendergap-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Gendergap digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Marfan syndrome image (Keilana)
2. Re: Marfan syndrome image (Lisette Kalshoven)
3. Marfan syndrome image (Neotarf) (Ellie Kesselman)
4. Re: Marfan syndrome image (SarahSV)
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 11:54:48 -0500
From: Keilana <keilanawiki@gmail.com>
To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
participation of women within Wikimedia projects."
<gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image
Message-ID:
<CADYPWKkAs3TK=yGWvtJBHuks+-2pdNyNR3JYYxD_cBuem8P_ew@mail. >gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
One option in these cases is to anonymize the image to make the subject not
immediately recognizable - one common way I see to do this is to block out
the subject's eyes or blur their face. I would offer to do this but I have
no idea how to work any kind of image editing program, so it would probably
be a disaster!
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well said, Lane. We lack a clear consensus around what kind of consent is
> required for the subject of photos. It's an area that deserves attention.
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Lane Rasberry <lane@bluerasberry.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I know this issue. It does look like a mistake that the academic paper
>> has a 2.0 license and Wikipedia tags it as 2.5. Other than that issue, the
>> copyright seems in order.
>>
>> Wikimedia Commons does not have a clear policy on consent for images,
>> other than images should comply with local law. I would like to establish a
>> policy on consent because even though there is no policy, people document
>> consent in OTRS and petition to remove content based on lack of consent.
>>
>> More information about this image is in these places.
>>
>> - <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk: WikiProject_
>> Medicine/Archive_70#Patient_with_Marfans
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk: >WikiProject_Medicine/Archive_ 70#Patient_with_Marfans
>> >
>> - <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:PEG/ Wikimedia_
>> New_York_City/Development_of_a_model_release_process_for_
>> photos_and_video#Patient_with_Marfan_syndrome.2C_image_
>> taken_from_academic_medical_journal
>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:PEG/ >Wikimedia_New_York_City/ Development_of_a_model_ release_process_for_photos_ and_video#Patient_with_Marfan_ syndrome.2C_image_taken_from_ academic_medical_journal
>> >
>>
>> The issue of consent for photographs is not easy to resolve.
>>
>> yours,
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Neotarf <neotarf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Would someone look at the copyright issues surrounding the image in
>>> Marfan syndrome? This article was mentioned in the Signpost as being
>>> worked on in honor of Kevin Gorman. The image shows a pubescent child,
>>> partially clothed, apparently during a medical exam. The image was uploaded
>>> with a CC-by-2.5 license. But if you go to the copyright information in
>>> the case study, it says the article was published under 2.0 license. There
>>> is separate copyright statement for the image: "Written informed consent
>>> was obtained from the patient's parents for the publication of this case
>>> report and accompanying images. A copy of the consent form is available for
>>> review by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal." It says the child is 13
>>> years old and has a "global intellectual impairment".
>>>
>>> Is the consent needed for a medical study in Brazil the same type of
>>> consent needed to host an image on Commons? Does the license for the
>>> article also apply to the image of the child? Can someone sort through
>>> these issues?
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marfan_syndrome
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gendergap mailing list
>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>>> visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lane Rasberry
>> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
>> 206.801.0814
>> lane@bluerasberry.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gendergap mailing list
>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
>> visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
> visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/ >attachments/20160807/4d37edd5/ attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 14:12:21 +0200
From: Lisette Kalshoven <lk@kl.nl>
To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
participation of women within Wikimedia projects."
<gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image
Message-ID: <686BD62F-6AFB-4A93-9952-09F600E194F3@kl.nl >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Neotarf,
I also had a look at the copyright surrounding the image, and agree with your analysis:
* In any case the image should be CC BY 2.0 - not 2.5.
Technically I think this information provides you with the information that allows us to share on Commons and beyond under the CC BY 2.5 conditions, however - though I cannot be sure without reading the consent letter that the parents signed - it seems unlikely that the parents gave such broad permissions concerning the photograph of their daughter. They likely gave permission for publication in the medical journal, not necessarily sharing under a Creative Commons license. Though technically (copyright wise) they do not have to - unless they are the copyright holders of the image.
And even if the parents did give permission for the CC license - and this is simply my personal opinion - we should perhaps limit our use of the image on a more ethical standpoint of a half-naked pubescent underage girl. The image was clearly intended for an academic medical context, and although Wikipedia shows it in an encyclopaedic context, I would argue that we should refrain from sharing it and interchange it for an image that shows the syndrome on a more clothed person.
It is also possible that personality / image rights laws in Brazil (as well as child pornography laws) come in to play with regards to this image, but I am by no means an expert on those.
With kind regards,
Lisette Kalshoven
--
Kennisland | www.kennisland.nl | t +31205756720 | m +31613943237 | @lnkalshoven | skype: lisette.kalshoven
> On 05 Aug 2016, at 13:57, Neotarf <neotarf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Would someone look at the copyright issues surrounding the image in Marfan syndrome? This article was mentioned in the Signpost as being worked on in honor of Kevin Gorman. The image shows a pubescent child, partially clothed, apparently during a medical exam. The image was uploaded with a CC-by-2.5 license. But if you go to the copyright information in the case study, it says the article was published under 2.0 license. There is separate copyright statement for the image: "Written informed consent was obtained from the patient's parents for the publication of this case report and accompanying images. A copy of the consent form is available for review by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal." It says the child is 13 years old and has a "global intellectual impairment".
>
> Is the consent needed for a medical study in Brazil the same type of consent needed to host an image on Commons? Does the license for the article also apply to the image of the child? Can someone sort through these issues?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marfan_syndrome <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marfan_syndrome >
> _______________________________________________
> Gendergap mailing list
> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
> To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/ >attachments/20160805/aee6fdb0/ attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2016 00:56:29 -0700
From: Ellie Kesselman <myindigolife@gmail.com>
To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image (Neotarf)
Message-ID:
<CALDHZ8bQ7UZ3NHT54ix6xLxaqWrf+ eq9b_=Dt72_6xJQ0J2KWw@mail. gmail.com >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Regarding the Marfan syndrome image, I looked into it as well as I could.
It seems to be allowed for re-use per the terms of the Creative Commons
license in the source article. I changed the description of the image on
Wikimedia Commons to be "13 year old female" instead of woman, but that
doesn't help at all. The use of the image in the Wikipedia article bothers
me a lot, as she is an almost entirely naked 13 year old girl with an IQ of
50 according to the research article. I wish that it was not uploaded to
Commons to begin with. Doc James was the user who uploaded according to the
log. I can't find any reason to get it removed or deleted though. If anyone
else can look into it, as Neotarf mentioned, I would be grateful. In my
previous job, I worked for a state services program that cared for children
with debilitating congenital medical conditions, and this photograph makes
me feel very uncomfortable and sad because it seems exploitative to show
this female child naked from three views on Wikipedia, but I don't know
what to do about it.
--FeralOink
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/ >attachments/20160806/979ed1c1/ attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 11:00:22 -0700
From: SarahSV <sarahsv.wiki@gmail.com>
To: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the
participation of women within Wikimedia projects."
<gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image
Message-ID:
<CADo_u1w1nJB36h0qWywD2+1Oh6dETVzTPptR_kyY3kPjkeRpAQ@ >mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I've started a discussion on the file talk page on Commons if anyone would
like to comment.
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk: >MarfanWholeImage.jpg
Sarah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/ >attachments/20160807/c51a7059/ attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
------------------------------
End of Gendergap Digest, Vol 67, Issue 4
****************************************