I suggest avoiding getting too drawn into heated debate, neither do you need to take responsibility by yourself.
As always, Commons benefits from having a good case book to illustrate policy. As well as the UDRs being raised, it would not hurt to re-hash some of the DRs for marginal cases. I would not criticise anyone for applying a DR so specific cases can have further discussion. If there have been any DMCA related incidents these would be great to illustrate the issue.
As mentioned on IRC, if a number of the Commons admins remain concerned as to who would be liable for damages/claims in the case of restoring material on Commons, then we (Commonsists) should seek independent advice (considering our small number of active admins, it is fair that we should seek to protect their interests). To date, the WMF have not given admins or uploaders any comfort that they are not liable for the consequences of their actions in uploading or undeleting media that they know to be suspect against the URAA, I do not believe they ever will receive comfort. This is an area worth development on-wiki, better to understand the risk, and to have specific advice on record to refer back to should anything go wrong.
In the meantime, don't sweat too much over individual restorations or re-deletions, instead use these as cases for the bigger picture.
Fae
On 3 April 2014 21:00, Yann Forget yannfo@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Well, it doesn't go so easily. Some Commons admins refuse to accept the community decision, and want to maintain the status quo inspite of the huge majority of opinions for supporting this. They are usually the most vocal and bold admins. Some admins are supporting it, some are afraid to go against the bolder ones. Some admins who support it do not take part because of language issue.
Some admins specifically said that they would go against the community, no matter what. One admin even says that the
I am open for suggestions how to go forwards.
Regards,
Yann