[Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Personality rights
meta.sj at gmail.com
Sun Apr 8 15:45:58 UTC 2012
On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 8:42 AM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8 April 2012 13:39, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've sent you and Ryan an e-mail with a link to the deletion discussion.
> In a discussion like this, secret evidence is approximately worthless.
Indeed. This is the link I received by mail:
> I believe the closing admins' arguments also include that by uploading those
> images to Flickr, those actress would have already given consent?
Yes. Though the original uploader is rarely also the subject, and may
not have such consent. If the uploader did not upload directly to
Commons (but had their photos scraped from Flickr), and shows up later
to say that they made a mistake in setting their Flickr prefs and that
they or their subjects did not give consent for such distirbution, it
is hard to gainsay them.
In these cases I think we should accede to the photographer's request,
unless we have a strong specific reason to keep the image, after
reasonably verifying their identity.
Ryan Kaldari writes:
> What was the justification for not following the Photographs of identifiable people guideline?
Maarten Dammers writes:
> That probaby has to do with the fact that some people tried to (ab)use this rule to get images
> deleted they didn't like. Say I take http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Foundation_SOPA_Boiler_Room_Meeting.jpg
> If I would want to get rid of that picture I just say we don't have consent documented.
Those people are identifiable and in a private place. If the
photographer showed up and denied having consent, would we not
promptly take that photo down?
If one of the subjects showed up and denied giving consent and asked
for the photo to be removed, we should see if the photographer had
gotten consent. If not, again -- would we not take the photo down?
If not, then I must be misunderstanding that Commons guideline.
More information about the wikimedia-l