[Foundation-l] Free images and model releases

[Anthony DiPierro]

On 3/17/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> What really brought my attention to this matter is an image recently
> proposed as a featured image on enwiki:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sunbathe_Buttocks.jpg ... Now it
> may be that the image was created with the consent of the subjects, I
> don't intend to criticize this particular image...   But really, lets
> consider such an image with identifiable subjects who didn't know the
> image had been taken.  What if she were to return to her dorm room and
> find the Wikipedia article on sunbathing stapled to it?   Were the
> image taken without her consent it's quite possible that she'd be
> pissed, and I believe that she'd be justified. There is no reason that
> illustrations like this in Wikipedia can't be ones which are created
> with the subjects consent.  So even ignoring any possible legal issues
> with such images, I think we're breaking good ethics to use images
> like this without the subjects consent.
>
In a case like the one you give, I agree.  Wikipedia should respect
people's right to privacy (which applies in cases where the identity
of the person is not important for any educational/newsworthy
purpose).

> I'm considering proposing an addition to that practice, saying we
> should always prefer free licensed images which have no identifiable
> people or for which we have appropriate model releases over images
> with identifiable people and without releases.
>
I think this should only apply to non-famous individuals, and that it
should be a strict rule, not just a preference.

> No image deletion runs, no prohibitions against uploads, just a
> preference. In the majority of subjects on Wikipedia, any identifiable
> people are fairly incidental to the actual subject of the
> photograph.... Encouraging people to avoid getting identifiable shots
> of people where possible would probably be good for overall image
> quality even ignoring the potential legal and ethical implications,
> because clearly identifiable faces can be distracting.
>
> Thoughts?  I'm especially interested in knowing how the French
> Wikipedia handles identifiable images of people.