Hi everyone,
I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking here. I know someone has been indefinitely blocked in the past because he did not license his user page under the GFDL.
Also, is there a straightforward page which can be used to simply explain our rationale for not permitting fair use images in userspace? If not, might I recommend the creation of one as then it could be linked to. It may be the case that part of the reason that users are not removing fair use images on request is because some people are being heavy-handed with them in requesting removal. A page for this would be more friendly, and a message could be added something like "Hi, you have fair use images on your page, Image:X.png and Image:Y.jpg. These are not permitted to be used on user pages. Please read [[Wikipedia:Why fair use images are not permitted on user pages]] for more information on why this is the case."
Just a thought,
Chris
On 1/12/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking here.
I'm a little concerned here. While I think policy should be followed, I've been disturbed by the way this has been handled recently. Whether or not an image is "fair use" is sometimes disputed, and in any event handling this in a friendly way is far preferable to heavy-handed and drastic actions which might well drive good contributors from the project. If it's not an emergency (and, given that these images have been on user pages for months, if not years, I don't see how it could be), then I think delicacy and diplomacy is the right way to go.
Jay.
jayjg wrote:
I'm a little concerned here. While I think policy should be followed, I've been disturbed by the way this has been handled recently. Whether or not an image is "fair use" is sometimes disputed, and in any event handling this in a friendly way is far preferable to heavy-handed and drastic actions which might well drive good contributors from the project. If it's not an emergency (and, given that these images have been on user pages for months, if not years, I don't see how it could be), then I think delicacy and diplomacy is the right way to go.
I agree. I think a calm, friendly, and rational explanation of why fair use images cannot be used on user pages would be a simple way to get the vast majority of people who currently use them to remove them.
Chris
On 1/12/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
I agree. I think a calm, friendly, and rational explanation of why fair use images cannot be used on user pages would be a simple way to get the vast majority of people who currently use them to remove them.
I think your idea of having a page to explain this is a good idea, Chris, then users violating the policy (if it is a policy) could be directed there, and asked in the first instance to consider removing the image themselves. That would reduce a lot of the ill-feeling this issue is otherwise generating. Then if after a suitable period, the image is still there and fair use is still being claimed, it could be removed by others.
Sarah
slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
I think your idea of having a page to explain this is a good idea, Chris, then users violating the policy (if it is a policy) could be directed there, and asked in the first instance to consider removing the image themselves. That would reduce a lot of the ill-feeling this issue is otherwise generating. Then if after a suitable period, the image is still there and fair use is still being claimed, it could be removed by others.
My thoughts exactly.
Chris
On 1/12/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking here. I know someone has been indefinitely blocked in the past because he did not license his user page under the GFDL.
It's quite simple really. Wikipedia's biggest reason for qualifying for fair use is that it is a free educational resource. Userpages are just not educational. User pages would, if I read the situation right, be very little different from a GeoCities website or the equivilent. Image use would not qualify as fair use there; why should it here?
I would really appreciate if some statement from on high could clarify this point, as people don't seem likely to listen otherwise.
-- Sam
Sam Korn wrote:
On 1/12/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking here. I know someone has been indefinitely blocked in the past because he did not license his user page under the GFDL.
It's quite simple really. Wikipedia's biggest reason for qualifying for fair use is that it is a free educational resource. Userpages are just not educational. User pages would, if I read the situation right, be very little different from a GeoCities website or the equivilent. Image use would not qualify as fair use there; why should it here?
Seeing as how 99% of personal websites out there have images infringing on somebody's copyright, most users have the impression that nobody cares about the issue.
Perhaps it would be more effective to point out that WP is now a high-visibility site, and that all the other sites at WP's level (that are not personal page hosts) are pretty careful about copyright and attribution. You could even ask the user to try to find even one "fair use" picture on news.yahoo.com or some such, should drive the point home.
Stan
On 1/12/06, Stan Shebs shebs@apple.com wrote:
Seeing as how 99% of personal websites out there have images infringing on somebody's copyright, most users have the impression that nobody cares about the issue.
Perhaps it would be more effective to point out that WP is now a high-visibility site, and that all the other sites at WP's level (that are not personal page hosts) are pretty careful about copyright and attribution. You could even ask the user to try to find even one "fair use" picture on news.yahoo.com or some such, should drive the point home.
Perhaps it might also be worth mentioning that Wikipedia is *lucky* to be able to use material under fair use at all. In the UK you wouldn't be able to, nor in most other countries.
Copyrights is an are where we have to be particularly careful. IAR just cannot apply to it (though I have seen someone trying to), because there is enough confusion as it is and selective application of copyright law is plainly not going to help that. Copyrights is a fundamental policy, on a line with NPOV and that whole "you can edit" madness. Choosing when to apply NPOV would be asking for trouble. Choosing when to apply copyrights policies would certainly not be quite on the same scale, but it would have extremely unpleasant results.
I really do think that the only way people will not say "but $reason means it's alright" would be a blanket ban. As this is not about to come from our community, which is very fractured over this issue, it can only come from above.
This would be an ideal time for a fiat. :=)
-- Sam
On 1/12/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
This would be an ideal time for a fiat. :=)
-- Sam
I'm working on it. Of course it's no secret I'd like to go the german route.
-- geni
I really do think that the only way people will not say "but $reason means it's alright" would be a blanket ban. As this is not about to come from our community, which is very fractured over this issue, it can only come from above.
Is it technically possible at the moment to prevent images marked as fair use (ie, with a fair use template) from being used in user space? If so, is there a good reason for not enforcing that?
I suspect it's not possible because images are marked by using templates rather than, say, categories, but that could fairly easily be changed, no?
Steve
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:15:37 +0100, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
I really do think that the only way people will not say "but $reason means it's alright" would be a blanket ban. As this is not about to come from our community, which is very fractured over this issue, it can only come from above.
Is it technically possible at the moment to prevent images marked as fair use (ie, with a fair use template) from being used in user space? If so, is there a good reason for not enforcing that?
I suspect it's not possible because images are marked by using templates rather than, say, categories, but that could fairly easily be changed, no?
I doubht there is any such feature at the moment, though it might be possible implement by building on the existing "bad image" feature, effectively turn anyting labeled with a "fair use" template into a "bad image" with regards to the User: namespace (and others). You can't hard code this in because templates change, new are added and so forth, but a list in the MediaWiki namespace of "blacklisted" templates (or categories if that is easier) might be doable.
In the meantime someone with toolserver access could relatively easily make a bot that automaticaly remove anyting "fair use" from userpages, userbox templates and things like that.
On 1/12/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
It's quite simple really. Wikipedia's biggest reason for qualifying for fair use is that it is a free educational resource.
Everyone "qualifies" for fair use. The fact that Wikipedia is an educational resource is *one factor* in whether or not its use of certain images in certain ways is fair use.
Userpages are just not educational.
In general most userpages have a lessened educational purpose than articles. I wouldn't go any further than that. I certainly wouldn't say "userpages are just not educational".
User pages would, if I read the situation right, be very little different from a GeoCities website or the equivilent.
You definitely read it wrong. Wikipedia userpages are, in general, very different from the average geocities website.
Image use would not qualify as fair use there; why should it here?
Image use can and often does qualify as fair use there.
The only reason I can see not to use fair use images on user pages is that it is never necessary. So rather than waste time arguing case by case with each other you just ban it completely.
Anthony
Anthony DiPierro wrote:
User pages would, if I read the situation right, be very little different from a GeoCities website or the equivilent.
You definitely read it wrong. Wikipedia userpages are, in general, very different from the average geocities website.
How so? Neither are exempt from legal requirements to justify fair use.
John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]])
On 1/13/06, John Lee johnleemk@gawab.com wrote:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:
User pages would, if I read the situation right, be very little different from a GeoCities website or the equivilent.
You definitely read it wrong. Wikipedia userpages are, in general, very different from the average geocities website.
How so? Neither are exempt from legal requirements to justify fair use.
Actually, neither are publishers anyway, they are ISPs, so they don't have to justify fair use to anyone - they just have to take the content down if they receive a DMCA takedown notice.
But the two are different because the purpose of Wikipedia userpages is to help build an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a webhosting project - Geocities is - in my opinion that makes the two extremely different.
On 1/13/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 1/12/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
It's quite simple really. Wikipedia's biggest reason for qualifying for fair use is that it is a free educational resource.
Everyone "qualifies" for fair use. The fact that Wikipedia is an educational resource is *one factor* in whether or not its use of certain images in certain ways is fair use.
My phrasing was wrong, forgive me. I meant to say that Wikipedia's biggest asset in asserting that its use of copyright media is fair use is that it is a free educational resource.
Userpages are just not educational.
In general most userpages have a lessened educational purpose than articles. I wouldn't go any further than that. I certainly wouldn't say "userpages are just not educational".
Um, I have never seen an educational userpage. Have you an example?
User pages would, if I read the situation right, be very little different from a GeoCities website or the equivilent.
You definitely read it wrong. Wikipedia userpages are, in general, very different from the average geocities website.
How?
Image use would not qualify as fair use there; why should it here?
Image use can and often does qualify as fair use there.
On someone's personal website about themselves? Either you Merkins have *seriously* liberal copyright laws or we're talking at cross-purposes.
The only reason I can see not to use fair use images on user pages is that it is never necessary. So rather than waste time arguing case by case with each other you just ban it completely.
At least we agree on something!
-- Sam
On 1/13/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/13/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 1/12/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
It's quite simple really. Wikipedia's biggest reason for qualifying for fair use is that it is a free educational resource.
Everyone "qualifies" for fair use. The fact that Wikipedia is an educational resource is *one factor* in whether or not its use of certain images in certain ways is fair use.
My phrasing was wrong, forgive me. I meant to say that Wikipedia's biggest asset in asserting that its use of copyright media is fair use is that it is a free educational resource.
Being an educational resource is a factor, but it's only one. And being a free resource seems to me to provide as much of an argument against fair use as for it, as it means the distribution is much more widespread. Being nonprofit counts for something though, although userpages are pretty much always nonprofit as well as articles.
I think there's also some confusion over who is asserting fair use. It isn't really "Wikipedia", but rather the person who is using the content.
Userpages are just not educational.
In general most userpages have a lessened educational purpose than articles. I wouldn't go any further than that. I certainly wouldn't say "userpages are just not educational".
Um, I have never seen an educational userpage. Have you an example?
They're pretty much all educational to some extent. Just picking one randomly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrainyBroad. That's educational.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, the rule applies to the entire namespace, including subpages. Subpages are quite often educational in purpose, in fact many subpages either used to be or will be an article (actually more than one *userpage* wound up being turned into an article as well).
User pages would, if I read the situation right, be very little different from a GeoCities website or the equivilent.
You definitely read it wrong. Wikipedia userpages are, in general, very different from the average geocities website.
How?
I explained in another post, but the biggest difference is that Geocities is a personal homepage provider, and Wikipedia:ISNOT. The whole purpose of the user pages is to facilitate the production of an encyclopedia - that's very different from the purpose of Geocities pages.
Image use would not qualify as fair use there; why should it here?
Image use can and often does qualify as fair use there.
On someone's personal website about themselves? Either you Merkins have *seriously* liberal copyright laws or we're talking at cross-purposes.
Fair use is fairly liberal. The fact that the image is being distributed on a personal website isn't really a factor. What matters is how the image is being used.
The only reason I can see not to use fair use images on user pages is that it is never necessary. So rather than waste time arguing case by case with each other you just ban it completely.
At least we agree on something!
Well, there's a flipside to that argument, though, and it goes back to my previous statement that "what matters is how the image is being used". The fact that one namespace is considered out based on horribly flawed legal reasoning only serves to confuse people into thinking that another namespace (the article namespace) is OK.
The fact is that what namespace is being used is irrelevant, and even just the fact that Wikipedia is an educational website is only *one factor*.
Anyway, I think what's important is that things are explained right. All the other Wikipedias are doing fine without fair use, surely the English Wikipedia could do so as well.
Chris Jenkinson wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking here. I know someone has been indefinitely blocked in the past because he did not license his user page under the GFDL.
Also, is there a straightforward page which can be used to simply explain our rationale for not permitting fair use images in userspace? If not, might I recommend the creation of one as then it could be linked to. It may be the case that part of the reason that users are not removing fair use images on request is because some people are being heavy-handed with them in requesting removal. A page for this would be more friendly, and a message could be added something like "Hi, you have fair use images on your page, Image:X.png and Image:Y.jpg. These are not permitted to be used on user pages. Please read [[Wikipedia:Why fair use images are not permitted on user pages]] for more information on why this is the case."
Just a thought,
Chris
IANAL and this is just my opinion, but if the page discusses the topic of the image in a manner that an article would ordinarily qualify for fair use, I think fair use images should be permissible. For instance, [[User:Johnleemk/A History of Malay Special Rights Post-World War II]] discusses Malay privileges in Malaysia, and therefore a fair use image used on our relevant articles (i.e. [[Ketuanan Melayu]], [[Article 153 of the Constitution of Malaysia]]) is probably fair use.
For userpages in general (i.e. [[User:Johnleemk]]), though, I think it is insufficient to claim fair use, unless a substantial portion of the page discusses the image's topic in a manner that would qualify for fair use.
John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]])
John Lee wrote:
Chris Jenkinson wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking here. I know someone has been indefinitely blocked in the past because he did not license his user page under the GFDL.
Also, is there a straightforward page which can be used to simply explain our rationale for not permitting fair use images in userspace? If not, might I recommend the creation of one as then it could be linked to. It may be the case that part of the reason that users are not removing fair use images on request is because some people are being heavy-handed with them in requesting removal. A page for this would be more friendly, and a message could be added something like "Hi, you have fair use images on your page, Image:X.png and Image:Y.jpg. These are not permitted to be used on user pages. Please read [[Wikipedia:Why fair use images are not permitted on user pages]] for more information on why this is the case."
Just a thought,
Chris
IANAL and this is just my opinion, but if the page discusses the topic of the image in a manner that an article would ordinarily qualify for fair use, I think fair use images should be permissible. For instance, [[User:Johnleemk/A History of Malay Special Rights Post-World War II]] discusses Malay privileges in Malaysia, and therefore a fair use image used on our relevant articles (i.e. [[Ketuanan Melayu]], [[Article 153 of the Constitution of Malaysia]]) is probably fair use.
If you plan on putting that in article space some time, do it. [[WP:NOT]] a webhost...
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
John Lee wrote:
Chris Jenkinson wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking here. I know someone has been indefinitely blocked in the past because he did not license his user page under the GFDL.
Also, is there a straightforward page which can be used to simply explain our rationale for not permitting fair use images in userspace? If not, might I recommend the creation of one as then it could be linked to. It may be the case that part of the reason that users are not removing fair use images on request is because some people are being heavy-handed with them in requesting removal. A page for this would be more friendly, and a message could be added something like "Hi, you have fair use images on your page, Image:X.png and Image:Y.jpg. These are not permitted to be used on user pages. Please read [[Wikipedia:Why fair use images are not permitted on user pages]] for more information on why this is the case."
Just a thought,
Chris
IANAL and this is just my opinion, but if the page discusses the topic of the image in a manner that an article would ordinarily qualify for fair use, I think fair use images should be permissible. For instance, [[User:Johnleemk/A History of Malay Special Rights Post-World War II]] discusses Malay privileges in Malaysia, and therefore a fair use image used on our relevant articles (i.e. [[Ketuanan Melayu]], [[Article 153 of the Constitution of Malaysia]]) is probably fair use.
If you plan on putting that in article space some time, do it. [[WP:NOT]] a webhost...
It's inherently POV and to a certain extent original research. Since WP:NOT paper, there's not much of a point to deleting it, really. When I'm finished with it, I think I'll link to it from my userpage as a presentation of my views (since I think [[User:Johnleemk]] and its relevant subpages might not do that a good job of explaining why I think what I think). As an aside, WP might not be a webhost, but if you interprete it strictly, we might as well delete all userpages. :-p I think writing a lot in userspace is okay as long as you contribute to the encyclopedia as well.
John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]])
John Lee wrote:
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
John Lee wrote:
Chris Jenkinson wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking here. I know someone has been indefinitely blocked in the past because he did not license his user page under the GFDL.
Also, is there a straightforward page which can be used to simply explain our rationale for not permitting fair use images in userspace? If not, might I recommend the creation of one as then it could be linked to. It may be the case that part of the reason that users are not removing fair use images on request is because some people are being heavy-handed with them in requesting removal. A page for this would be more friendly, and a message could be added something like "Hi, you have fair use images on your page, Image:X.png and Image:Y.jpg. These are not permitted to be used on user pages. Please read [[Wikipedia:Why fair use images are not permitted on user pages]] for more information on why this is the case."
Just a thought,
Chris
IANAL and this is just my opinion, but if the page discusses the topic of the image in a manner that an article would ordinarily qualify for fair use, I think fair use images should be permissible. For instance, [[User:Johnleemk/A History of Malay Special Rights Post-World War II]] discusses Malay privileges in Malaysia, and therefore a fair use image used on our relevant articles (i.e. [[Ketuanan Melayu]], [[Article 153 of the Constitution of Malaysia]]) is probably fair use.
If you plan on putting that in article space some time, do it. [[WP:NOT]] a webhost...
It's inherently POV and to a certain extent original research. Since WP:NOT paper, there's not much of a point to deleting it, really. When I'm finished with it, I think I'll link to it from my userpage as a presentation of my views (since I think [[User:Johnleemk]] and its relevant subpages might not do that a good job of explaining why I think what I think). As an aside, WP might not be a webhost, but if you interprete it strictly, we might as well delete all userpages. :-p I think writing a lot in userspace is okay as long as you contribute to the encyclopedia as well.
In that case, you'd better not have "Fair Use" images on it ;)
heavy-handed with them in requesting removal. A page for this would be more friendly, and a message could be added something like "Hi, you have fair use images on your page, Image:X.png and Image:Y.jpg. These are not permitted to be used on user pages. Please read [[Wikipedia:Why fair use images are not permitted on user pages]] for more information on why this is the case."
Hi, you're using a copyrighted image in a way which actually isn't "fair use". We're allowed to use certain copyrighted images in Wikipedia strictly within the terms of "fair use", such as criticising the image. But we can't just use them everywhere without violating the owner's copyright. Sorry, but could you please remove the image as soon as possible. [link link link]
Get heavy handed when they refuse to comply (like {test1}, {test2} etc)
Steve