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