[Gendergap] Resolution:Images of identifiable people

[phoebe ayers]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Sydney Poore <sydney.poore at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I have no clue how I missed this (and perhaps it's been posted before?)
>>
>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Images_of_identifiable_people
>>
>> Perhaps we can lend a hand to assist in this?
>>
>> -Sarah
>
> Yes, the WMF Board passed this resolution in May, and it helped focus the
> discussion away from the idea that people want to delete controversial
> content only because of they are prudes. Model consent for anyone who is
> identifiable and has a reason to expect privacy is a minimum standard that
> needs to be enforced on all wikis now. For all the reasons that we've
> discussed recently on this mailing list, images of women who are being
> sexualized benefit greatly from good enforcement of this policy.
>
> IMO, the Commons policy needs to be tweaked to to ensure that the person
> giving consent for the image to be taken understands that it will be
> uploaded with a free license, and what that means.
>
> Most of the the medical groups policies about medical images of people
> assumes that the person in the image has less knowledge about where the
> image might be used, and says that information needs to be provided to the
> person so that they understand how widely that it might be disseminated.
>
> Right now we don't have a procedures in place that help us gather informed
> consent from models. This is an area that needs more work.
>
> Also, we need to tweak the policy so that people who appear in a semi-public
> places are protected. Many times people will go into a semi-public place
> with  the expectation that only the people in that location will see them.
> IMO, sunbathing on a beach outside your rented beach house does not mean
> that you intended your image to be taken and uploaded for anyone in the
> world to see and be re-used in publications without your consent. The same
> is true for many people going about their normal routine. I don't think that
> someone walking from their car (or bus) into work intended to give consent
> for their photograph to be taken, uploaded with a free license, and their
> body parts and fashion apparel be categorized, especially in a sexualized
> way.
>
> Since the people in many images do not have contact information provided,
> someone re-using the image can not contact them to get permission. This
> problem makes many of our images on Commons useless for people that want to
> use best practices.
>
> Sydney Poore
> User:FloNight

Sydney -- all good ideas, for sure! The resolution was intended as a
(re)focusing device, as you note; and there is still lots of work to
be done. One of the areas is making sure that all wikis have a similar
policy. Would it help to put together a page on meta to coordinate
this?

cheers,
phoebe