Hi,
2014-06-17 15:07 GMT+05:30 Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org:
Hi Yann,
While we can have a different discussion about methods used and tone applied, if I understand correctly the core argument/discussion point here is the question whether US law applies to Commons or not; more specifically: whether a picture that is (likely?) not in the Public Domain in the US, but is in the public domain in its 'source country' should be considered 'free' or not.
No, the issue is not US law. The issue is the ridiculous requirements coming from some contributors.
The issue is that these contributors use the US law as a pretext asking for deletion again and again, when there is no reason to doubt that they were published. Looking at their demands, it seems that they would ask anything based on any law.
This is a returning discussion, and I'm always confused what exactly the answer is to that. The discussion is equally valid for any content project actually - all being hosted in the US. It would be good to have a more fundamental answer to it, and then follow it.
Whether or not the nominating account is a 'delete only' account etc. is less relevant to this discussion. The core question remains the same. It is a bit technocrat, I know.
The same user first argue for deletion because of URAA, and when it was not successful, ask again for deletion using another reason. Actually, this account does not produce anything useful. The only contributions are requests for deletions on controversial cases like this one. Looking for real copyright violations is useful, but arguing again and again on borderline cases is not.
I thought this question was already put for the WMF legal team as a question, but I wasn't able to find so quickly whether a useful reply resulted from that consultation.
Lodewijk
Regards,
Yann
2014-06-17 1:34 GMT+02:00 Yann Forget yannfo@gmail.com:
Hi,
Some Commons contributors like to ask impossible requirements, and threaten to delete files if these are not met. We have now a case of famous pictures from the government of Israel and Israel Defense Forces.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Matanya#Files_and_pages_that_we...
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Beba_Idels...
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Abba_Hushi...
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Aharon_Mes...
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Avraham_Sh...
These are famous and valuable pictures, including two featured pictures on the Hebrew Wikipedia. These files have already been deleted and restored 3 times. When the URAA issue was not convincing enough, a new reson for deletion was advanced: that publication details were not given. Anyone with 2 bits of common sense can understand that these famous pictures were published soon after they were taken. There is no reasonable doubt about that. In addition, publication is not a requirement for being in the public domain in Israel.
After I restored these images, I was threatem by LGA, who is a delete-only account:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Use... There, more contributors argue on this issue.
By asking absurb requirements about publication details, these contributors threaten the project as a whole. If insisting, it will lead people to upload pictures like these locally instead of Commons. Then the idea of a central repository for all Wikimedia projects is gone.
Instead of looking for a reason to destroy these files, they should try to find a reason to keep them.
Regards,
Yann