In my view it has not that much to do with AGF. In general people at Commons do assume good faith, or at least they should. But when an user uploads a mix of own work with copyvios, or a GLAM shows a complete lack of understanding on copyright laws (by uploading modern art, for instance, claiming that they own the paintings, so the copyright is theirs), in those situations, use of the AGF principle is not possible, and the Precautionary Principle enters the scene. In those situations it is common that the baby gets thrown out with the bath water, which, IMO, is understandable and expectable. In any case, whatever gets wrongly deleted in those situations can be recovered afterwards.
Best, Paulo
Peter Southwood peter.southwood@telkomsa.net escreveu no dia segunda, 13/05/2019 à(s) 08:03:
The precautionary principle is labelled as an official policy of Commons. I think it should be mentioned on the assume good faith page as it explains why it is sometimes impractical to assume good faith to the extent of allowing content to remain. If not mentioned, it can lead to severe disappointment and surprise. It should be made very clear to anyone who uploads that this policy may be applied, and why it is necessary. It would also be useful to explain what to do if it is applied where it should not be applied, whether from lack of evidence or for any other reason, and how to avoid the problem. It might even be advisable to state this policy clearly in the upload wizard. When people have been reasonably warned, they are less likely to be offended. Cheers, Peter Southwood
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Yann Forget Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 6:10 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
This was reverted. It is a dishonest edit with a misleading summary.
Regards, Yann Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordinator https://www.jaijagat2020.org/ +91-74 34 93 33 58 (also WhatsApp)
Le dim. 12 mai 2019 à 19:59, Andrew Lih andrew.lih@gmail.com a écrit :
This episode exposes a policy of Commons that may be unknown to many
folks
- the precautionary principle.
It is an explicit exception to assuming good faith, so I noted this on
the
AGF page on Commons.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Assume_good_faith&am...
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 10:23 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga < galder158@hotmail.com> wrote:
As I am the author of the post, some remarks:
- Commons is, indeed, the only [cloud] storage for file in most of
the
Wikipedias. Making an accusation of using Commons as a storage place is unfair and nonsense.
- Communication could be better, of course, but we don't have to
think
on experienced editors and wikimedians, but on people we are trying to convince to upload to the Commons and find this burden. They don't know
how
to communicate and why they must do it.
- The upload system allow you to upload something if you are the
author. Period.
- Claiming that something is a derivative work without saying which
is
the original work is not a good practice.
- Of course, commons volunteers are few, and they have a great
job-queue. But outreach volunteers are less, and a project like this
can
take a whole year of volunteer work.
- After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was
able
to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone.
Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have
less
problems.
Cheers
Galder ________________________________ From: Wikimedia-l wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf
of
Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images
on
commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come
from
cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle them could work.
Vito
Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 15:31 James Heilman <
jmh649@gmail.com
ha scritto:
It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested
in
having more admins?
James
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to
see
if this aspect of the more boring side of sysop tools could be reduced.[1]
Not specifically advocating auto-deletion, but daily housekeeping image matches to highly likely copyrighted categories would make
mass
housekeeping very easy.
A separate old chestnut was my proposal to introduce systemic image hashes, which neatly show "close" image matches.[2] With a Commons
hat
on, such a project would be of far more immediate pragmatic use
than
mobile-related and structured data-related projects that seem to
suck
up all the oxygen and volunteer time available.
Note that the history of these project/funding ideas is so long,
that
several of the most experienced long term volunteers that were originally interested have since retired. Without some positive
short
term encouragement, not only do these ideas never reach the useful experiment stage, but the volunteers involved simply fade away.
Links
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/02#Goog...
Fae
On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 12:21, Amir Sarabadani <ladsgroup@gmail.com
wrote:
IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores
support
for
images that might be copyright violation, or both.
Best
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter <
ymbalt@gmail.com
wrote:
> Just the active community itself is too small, compared with
the
amount of
> material it has to deal with. > > Cheers > Yaroslav > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <
benjaminikuta@gmail.com>
> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or
capable
to
> do > > the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit? > > > > > > > > On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <
polimerek@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all
undeleted.
> > > > > > The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing
several
> GLAM-related > > > mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page
describing
what it
> > is > > > intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you
can
create a
> > > project template to mark all uploads with them. > > > > > > See:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> > > > > > Despite practical issue of avoiding unnecessary clashes
with
Common's
> > > admins - creating template and project page helps to
promote
you
> project > > > across Wikimedia communities and may inspire others to do
something
> > similar. > > > > > > Commons is indeed quite hostile environment for uploaders,
but
on
the
> > other > > > hand it is constantly flooded by hundreds of copyright
violating
> files a > > > day: > > > > > > See the list from just one day: > > > > > > >
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2019/05/01
> > > > > > so this hostility works both ways - Common's admins have to
cope
with
> > > aggressive hostile copyright violators every day, and after
some
time -
> > > decide to leave or became being hostile themselves... and
the
other
> issue > > > is decreasing number of active admins and OTRS agents. > > > > > > I think - sooner or later - all this system - uploads -
screening
> uploads > > > by admins, and OTRS agreements - needs deep rethinking. > > > > > > > > > niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 10:48 Mister Thrapostibongles < > > > thrapostibongles@gmail.com> napisał(a): > > > > > >> Hello all, > > >> > > >> There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the
Commons
> > components > > >> of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia
Commons: a
highly
> > >> hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at
the
Education
> > >> Newsletter > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >
https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/News/April_2019/Wikimedia_Comm...
> > >> > > >> As far as I can understand it, some students on an
Outreach
project
> > >> uploaded some rather well-made video material, and comeone
on
Commons
> > >> deleted them because they appeared to well-made to be
student
projects
> > and > > >> so concluded they were copyright violations. But some
rather
odd
> > remarks > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of
uploaded
> > copyrighted > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that
doesn't
> care." > > >> and > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud
storage
for
> > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ". > > >> > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute? > > >> > > >> Thrapostibongles > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
and
> > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > >> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> , > > >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- Amir (he/him) _______________________________________________
faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- -Andrew Lih Author of The Wikipedia Revolution US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016) Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015) Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American University, Columbia University, USC
Email: andrew@andrewlih.com WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe