This has been discussed multiple times on Wikimedia Commons and dewp, thus i see no need
to discuss it here again.
The RFC on dewp [1] to ban such photos from being used failed, which speaks for itself.
--Steinsplitter
[1]
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/keine_Bilder_in_Arti…
________________________________
Von: Wikimedia-l <wikimedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org> im Auftrag von rupert
THURNER <rupert.thurner(a)gmail.com>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. März 2017 10:22
An: Wikimedia Mailing List
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business
case 1:
<removed>
to name a couple of other persons if you want to google for
"abmahnfalle wikipedia" (cease and desist trap wikipedia):
<removed>
personally i favor a technical solution, as i find it pointless to put
people on some pillory for doing what the law allows them to do. like
separating into two commons - one save for reuse, one to be used if
you know a lawyer. or to built into wikipedias infrastructure to
include the license and author within the picture, fix wordpress,
etcetc. besides of course fixing the CC license in case it still is
not ready for proper online usage.
rupert
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Lodewijk <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org> wrote:
I've run into one or two people on OTRS that were
reusing the materials in
good faith, but that got a letter from such a photographer that wanted to
see money (and that is just spillover from Germany to the Netherlands).
Examples linked in the discussion include this warning and bill
<http://www.gulli.com/news/19712-abmahnung-wegen-bild-aus-der-wikipedia-2013-01-12>
of
hundreds of euros for a foundation that did not specify the author name or this
website that was asked <https://historischdenken.hypotheses.org/3677> to
pay over a thousand euro. The discussion on the German WIkipedia may
contain more links, and the linked blogs are insightful on how this
behaviour is being perceived. Just google for "abmahnung bild wikipedia" to
find more examples and stories.
Hope that clarifies. German Wikipedians may have better examples.
Lodewijk
2017-03-04 12:47 GMT+01:00 David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>om>:
This thread is notably long on hypothetical and
meta-level discussions
and very short on concrete examples of the supposedly problematic
uploads under discussion. What are the generally accepted examples of
what we're actually talking about here?
- d.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>