On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
As it's currently drafted, I believe this approach
is a complete non-starter
(for the reasons that Rillke and I described on the talk page:
From that page it seems you are worried about the
approach but Rillke is not.
As he wrote, "you are welcome to edit the template". He is not fixed
on having a "file a takedown request" button, and would likely be ok
without it. The interface innovation is having a "report this image"
overlay, not the details of the second step. (The page for filing
community reports already includes a note about how to file a formal
takedown if necessary.)
Rillke also noted on the project page itself that he is waiting on a
response from legal. (Though he also noted he is not in a rush :) So
it would be polite to let him know the current status, even if it is
"we're no longer thinking about this" or "please rewrite in the
But it seems to me that putting the resources
of technical implementation or legal evaluation in is very premature. What
we need is a revised proposal that will work without massively scaling up
the amount of staff time devoted to evaluating requests
A community member is offering to work on the technical
implementation, already partly done. Legal evaluation does not seem
premature to me. I suggested a simple variation on the talk page that
would have minimal staff impact.