Scope is a Commons community decision,
OTRS is solely about licensing
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 15:30, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hoi,
No it is an administrative process. It follows its own rules IN ORDER TO do
what it does. The notion that material is to be useful to Wikipedia is NOT
covered by any legal restraints. This notion that is alive and well, the
notion that copyright can be retroactively applied never mind the original
copyright holder is that as well.
Yes, the underlying work is legal, the process is definitely not and
consequently the process has to be revisited, is to be revisited in order
for OTRS to function for all of us.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 08:09, Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)gmail.com> wrote:
to quote Gerard
There is no law that insists on the existing rules and regulations as put
forward, rules and regulations that are blatantly
unfit
for purpose.
OTRS is very much a legal process because its related to Copyright laws,
both in the US and in the country in which they reside. Every
transaction(image upload) is a person giving away their rights in regards
to that work OTRS needs to ensure that the person is fully aware of the
consequences of that action. OTRS holds an absolute record of that
action
of when it took place, it protects all parties
should there be an issue
in
the future in particular the WMF and our
volunteers who were involved in
the process.
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 13:57, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com
wrote:
> Hoi,
> Thank you for demonstrating the extend OTRS is not fit for purpose. I
> understand that OTRS is governed by rules and regulations but a
reference
is made
to "legal". There is no law that insists on the existing rules
and
regulations as put forward, rules and regulations
that are blatantly
unfit
for purpose.
Particularly the line: "- it must not say the use is to, for, or on
Wikipedia" is problematic because either this is a list as stated what
OTRS
adheres to or, it is not. It is a negative and as
such it reads that it
is
> NOT about any Wikipedia and its vagaries.
>
> Yet again it is brought to the attention that the negative attitude is
to
> be acceptable because of a perceived
workload. Apparently it is easier
to
say no
than to say yes and that is in itself mystifying.
OTRS has not moved on with the time and as such it does not even know
selfies... An issue not confined to OTRS is that understanding of
copyright
> and licensing is dim anyway. When a copyright holder provides us with
> material, it is licensed by the copyright holder to be available under
a
> WMF permitted license. When the copyright
holder provides it under a
> secondary license elsewhere or when our material is used elsewhere
with a
more
restrictive license, it does not follow that we are in breach of
copyright. I have fought such "delete on sight" battles and the only
result
> is no response on the image that was to be speedily deleted. The rule
> should be; when material is provided to us, the license is checked at
the
> time and any and all issues NOT involving
the copyright holder are to
be
seen as
irrelevant.
OTRS is a Wikimedia Foundation sanctioned function. It insists to
function
as is and therefore *a new mandate is required*
because as is, it does
the
> worst possible service. There is no Wikipedia, there are 300+, there
are
> other projects that require a functioning
Commons and as it is, it is
not
fit for
purpose.
You may remember when English Wikipedia had egg on its face because of
the
deletion of what became a Nobel prize winner.
There are MANY science
awards
and we want a picture for all awardees in
addition, in the Scholia tool
we
> want pictures of any and all people that authored a paper.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 02:06, Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > For legal reasons OTRS requires very specific wording, it declines
> > permissions that fail to meet that very strict wording.
> >
> > The person must;
> >
> > - establish their authority to license the image
> > - the license must be a free license PD or CC-by
> > - it must not say the use is to, for, or on Wikipedia
> > - it needs a URL to associate the permission with
> >
> > If the media meets these requirements than it will be accept, if it
> doesnt
> > it gets rejected. Scope is something that gets decided on on Commons.
> >
> > Wikidata has had an impact on scope, quite literally everything is
now
> > within scope. We havent even yet got
to the issue about Wikidata
items
>
including trademarked logos and copyrighted works for which Commons
cant
have
images under fairuse
Commons has fallen behind when it comes to the capability of taking
photos
> of ones self (selfies) the default position when Commons started was
that
> > taking a high quality photograph of yourself wasnt possible there
must
> have
> > been someone else pushing the button. What happens is Commons asks
for
the
subject to obtain permission from the
photographer and submit that to
OTRS,
> the systems falls over because the photographer cant prove that the
photo
> > they took of themselves was taken by themselves because the
underlying
> > assumption is that that isnt possible.
The vast majority of agents
on
> the
> > commons permission queue are people from commons who have learnt the
> > policies and have the tools to do the work.
> >
> > OTRS permission behaves as expected because there is a very narrow
> > definition of whats acceptable, anything that doesnt fit gets
rejected.
The
> very real need to be pro-active in ensuring the permissions queue
doesnt
> get overwhelmed and backlogged contributes
to the fact that the grey
is
> treated as black -- close it, delete it,
move on.
>
> In an ideal scenario a closer relationship with google via flickr to
make
> > it possible for Wikidata to link in there as well would be a
potential
> > solution to those areas where copyright
is an issue as it would
still
>
enable the ability of having an image accessible via a link.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 05:00, Michael Maggs <michael(a)maggs.name>
wrote:
>
> > This has nothing to do with Commons only supporting Wikipedia.
Commons
> > > supports ALL of the Wikimedia projects, and always has.
> > >
> > > As is quite clearly set out in the Commons SCOPE policy, “a file
that
is
> > used in good faith on a Wikimedia project is always considered
> > educational”, and hence is in scope. Of course, that includes
Wikidata.
> > >
> > > Under the same policy, Commons does not editorialise on behalf of
any
of
> > the projects, and an image that is acceptable to Wikidata is by
design
> > > acceptable to Commons.
> > >
> > > If the Wikidata community considers that an item on an individual
is
> not
> > > acceptable (for example because it has been added solely for
> > > self-promotion), Wikidata can - under its own rules - delete it,
and
> > hence
> > > the link to the image on Commons.
> > >
> > > Commons would then delete the image as not in use (and not
otherwise
> >
educational).
> >
> > None of this relies in any way on the specific definition of
‘notable’
> as
> > > used on the Wikipedias; that’s simply not relevant.
> > >
> > > The problem here seems to be an additional hurdle that has
apparently
> > been
> > > added to the guidance given to OTRS volunteers. OTRS has so far
as
I
know
> no mandate to decline images that fall within Commons Scope, and if
they
> > are indeed doing that, the guidance should be changed.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > > On 25 Feb 2020, at 16:11, Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > Apparantly at Commons they have standardised themselves to only
> support
> > > > Wikipedia.
> > > >
> > > > At Wikidata we have people who are notable according to our
> standards.
> > We
> > > > are actively asking them for images to illustrate our
information.
The
> > best
> > > suggestion we get is: do not ask for images because they are
deleted
at
> > Commons.
> >
> > When this is what awaits us when we standardise on one label
Wikipedia,
> > it
> > > is obvious that this is the worst scenario for the "other"
projects.
> > The
> > > > projects who operate to different standards who have notability
> > criteria
> > > > different from English Wikipedia.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > GerardM
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > GN.
> >
> > *Power of Diverse Collaboration*
> > *Sharing knowledge brings people together*
> > Wikimania Bangkok 2020
> > August 5 to 9
> > hosted by ESEAP
> >
> > Wikimania:
https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > Noongarpedia:
https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
> > Photo Gallery:
http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
--
GN.
*Power of Diverse Collaboration*
*Sharing knowledge brings people together*
Wikimania Bangkok 2020
August 5 to 9
hosted by ESEAP
Wikimania:
https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Noongarpedia:
https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
Photo Gallery:
http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
_______________________________________________
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>
--
GN.
*Power of Diverse Collaboration*
*Sharing knowledge brings people together*
Wikimania Bangkok 2020
August 5 to 9
hosted by ESEAP
Wikimania: