Daniel P.B.Smith wrote:

Seems to me that if we want to encourage better voluntary description, the upload page should be redesigned so that:

a) It provides not just a checkbox, but a _choice_ of common license situations, including GFDL, public domain, fair use, used with permission, and of course "other."

b) You are presented with concise information that will help the layperson determine _which_ of these situations applies.

I'm still not a fan of the idea that we ask uploaders to identify a choice of license. We don't ask text contributors to identify what portions are GFDL, public domain, or fair use. We simply expect that they comply with our copyright policy and the GFDL. As I've said before, we don't need to encourage people to engage in the amateur practice of law - many are already more than willing to do so.

c) You are presented with some apparatus that encourages you to enter _all_ the relevant information, _all at once_, _before_ uploading.

Most definitely.

I'm still unclear, when I upload a photograph that I've taken myself and am willing to release under GFDL, whether I should include language that asserts "copyright ©2004 by Daniel P. B. Smith and licensed under the term of the Wikipedia copyright."

You can if you want, though I'll make the general point that actual copyright notices are not necessary. Creative expression is copyrighted by default, as you probably already know, and a notice is merely a handy reminder of that fact.

--Michael Snow