[Foundation-l] Legal requirements for sexual content -- help, please!

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure the presence or absence of a legal imperative is fully
> relevant to the underlying question. The Commons project has a moral
> responsibility to take reasonable steps to ensure that subjects of
> sexually explicit media are (a) of legal majority and (b) have
> provided releases for publishing the content. The regulations exist
> for a good reason - to protect the subjects of photos from abuse and
> invasion of privacy. Why should we avoid taking those same steps?


The obligation to protect people against an invasion of their privacy
is not limited to, or even mostly applicable to sexual images.
Although sexual images are one of several "most important" cases, the
moral imperative to respect the privacy of private individuals exists
everywhere.

As such, Commons has a specific policy on this:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people#Photographs_taken_in_a_private_place