Thank you for confirming what I said. On Jul 6, 2014 10:17 PM, "Lilburne" lilburne@tygers-of-wrath.net wrote:
On 04/07/2014 09:37, Andy Mabbett wrote:
On Jul 4, 2014 7:55 AM, "Frédéric Schütz" schutz@mathgen.ch wrote:
Their main worry seems to be "how do we make sure that people do not use
the pictures in a way we're not happy with"
That question qualifies as "frequently asked"; my usual answer is to the effect that "You cannot - but anyone who is going to use them maliciously is not going to worry about niceties like copyright. The people whose activities you limit by applying a restrictive license are the good guys - and yourselves."
Not so Andy. Over on Commons last year someone had taken a photo of a woman and a horse from flickr cropped it and tagged it as Bestiality. As per usual the Commons porn patrol fought like cornered rats to keep it. Why should people have to go through that? Yeah the bad guys won't give a fig about the license, but the web host most certainly will. When they were taking photos of little kids from flickr accounts to post on Orkut and play age related sex games, it wasn't the complaints of the parents to the uploaders that got it stopped (haha luser you can't do nothing), nor complaints to Google (send us your 6 yo kid's drivers license), it was the DMCA takedowns that brought an end to it.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/02/google_orkut_dmca/
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe