[WikiEN-l] Copyright, images and the voicing of doubt

[Ray Saintonge]

Tony Sidaway wrote:

>What is the policy on copyrights that are disputed on suspicion?
>
>Suppose there exists a photograph donated under GFDL and the uploader says
>that it was produced by him.
>Is the assertion of doubt by a third party _alone_ reason to post this as
>a "possible" copyright violation and recommend it for deletion on that
>basis?
>I'm not talking about the case where circumstantial evidence or other
>evidence exists to suggest that the image is a copyright violation.  Only
>that someone has voiced the possibility that it is one.
>
A third party should have something more than mere suspicion or doubt 
for making his claim.  "Assume good faith" implies that we believe that 
the contributor is telling the truth when he says that he took the 
picture himself. 

The reality of third party claims is that most of the time they come 
from do-gooders who don't have a clue about what they are saying.  It is 
with good reason that one of the conditions in issuing a takedown order 
is that the person issuing the order must have some relationship to the 
copyright work before he can ask for it to be taken down. 

Another thing to keep in mind is the three-year limitation for taking 
action on a copyright violation.  If something has been on the site for 
at least three years it is probably safe to keep.  The argument that 
continuing availability may result in new limitation periods can 
probably be countered by invoking the doctrine of laches.

Ec