[Wikimediaindia-l] Fwd: Copyright problems of images from India
wheredevelsdare at hotmail.com
wheredevelsdare at hotmail.com
Tue May 10 11:18:48 UTC 2011
I dont understand where PD is concerned why proof is asked for, have we forgotten "Assuming good faith"?
> From: wikimediaindia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Wikimediaindia-l Digest, Vol 35, Issue 16
> To: wikimediaindia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:07:14 +0000
>
> Send Wikimediaindia-l mailing list submissions to
> wikimediaindia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> wikimediaindia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> wikimediaindia-l-owner at lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikimediaindia-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. 13th Meetup of Wikipedians in [[Pune]], [[Maharashtra]] -
> please note details and register (Ashwin Baindur)
> 2. Fwd: Copyright problems of images from India (Shiju Alex)
> 3. Re: Fwd: Copyright problems of images from India (Bala Jeyaraman)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 11:15:53 +0530
> From: Ashwin Baindur <ashwin.baindur at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] 13th Meetup of Wikipedians in [[Pune]],
> [[Maharashtra]] - please note details and register
> To: "Mailing list for Wikimedians in Pune, India"
> <wikimedia-in-pun at lists.wikimedia.org>, mr-wiki at yahoogroups.com,
> wikimediaindia-l <wikimediaindia-l at lists.wikimedia.org>, Wikipedians
> for Indian Nature <Wiki_India_Nature at googlegroups.com>,
> wikimedia-in-mum <wikimedia-in-mum at lists.wikimedia.org>, "Agarwal,
> Shirish" <shirishag75 at gmail.com>, "Bagade, Ashok "
> <ashok.bagade at gmail.com>, Col Ashwin Baindur
> <ashwin.baindur at gmail.com>, "Jogalekar, Sudhanwa "
> <sudhanwa.com at gmail.com>, "Patankar, Anand"
> <anandpatankar at gmail.com>, "Rasal, Prasad" <studioblossoms at gmail.com>,
> "Sharma, Chandan" <chandan7882 at yahoo.com>, "Vaidya, Prasad"
> <prasad.vaidya at gmail.com>
> Message-ID: <BANLkTimrnYci=Pg=V-X7AS+XztUUFLqDkA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> A reminder for the 13th Meetup of Wikipedians in [[Pune]], [[Maharashtra]].
> Please see the[[Wikipedia:Meetup/Pune/Pune13|meetup page]] for details and
> indicate your attendance.
> The intended purpose of the meetup is:
> <blockquote> '''to discuss the Campus Ambassador Program and forthcoming
> WikiConference 2011'''.</blockquote>
> ''Highlights - '''Hisham Mundol''', National Director, India Program &
> '''Bishakha
> Datta''', Global Trustee, Wikimedia Foundation will be present for the
> meetup.''
>
>
> [[User:AshLin|AshLin]] ([[User talk:AshLin|talk]]) 04:13, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Ashwin Baindur
> ------------------------------------------------------
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/attachments/20110509/2b4437ac/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 12:37:25 +0200
> From: Shiju Alex <shijualexonline at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Fwd: Copyright problems of images from
> India
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>, "Discussion list on Indian
> language projects of Wikimedia."
> <wikimediaindia-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <BANLkTin0sOEbFnw9YROCdrMyM463UdDynw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear All,
>
> I am forwarding the below mail on behalf of a Malayalam wikipedian who is
> very active in Wikimedia Commons.
>
> Of late it is becoming very difficult for many Wikimedians from India to
> contribute to Wikimedia Commons especially if they are uploading historical
> images which are in PD. We are facing lot of issues (and many a times
> unnecessary controversies also) with the historic images in PD, images of
> wall paintings and statues, and so on. Please see the below mail in which
> Sreejith citing various examples.
>
> It is almost impossible for the uploaders from India to show proof of the
> century old images of Hindu Gods and Goddesses. The current policies of
> Commons are not permitting many of the PD images from India citing all sorts
> of policies which might be relevant only in the western world. With these
> type of policies we are going to have serious issues when we try to go for
> GLAM type events.
>
> But I also do not know the solution for this issue. Requesting constructive
> discussion.
>
>
> Shiju Alex
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Sreejith K. <sreejithk2000 at gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:03 PM
> Subject: Copyright problems of images from India
> To: Shiju Alex <shijualexonline at gmail.com>
>
>
> Shiju,
>
> As you might be aware already, we are having trouble keeping historical
> images about India in Wikimedia commons. This pertains mostly to images
> about Hindu gods and people who died before 1947.
>
> Please see the below examples:
>
> - File:Narayana
> Guru.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Narayana_Guru.jpg> -
> This is the image of Sree Narayana
> Guru<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana_Guru>,
> a Hindu saint, social reformer and is even considered a god by certain
> castes in Kerala. This image has been tagged as an image with No source.
> Narayana Guru expired in 1928 and considering the conditions in which India
> was in during that period and before, it is very difficult to get an image
> source online. Most active Wikipedians does not have access or information
> on how old the image is or where a source of it can be found. Any photograph
> published before 1941 in India is in public domain as per Indian copyright
> act. Common sense says that this image meets this criteria because the
> person was long lead before 1941, but we still need proof of the first
> publishing date. Deleting this image on grounds that no source could be
> found will only reduce the informative values of all the articles which this
> image is included in.
> - File:Aravana.JPG: This image has already been deleted, but you can see
> the amount of discussion that went in before deleting it. See
> Commons:Deletion
> requests/File:Aravana.JPG<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Aravana.JPG>.
> (An almost similar image can be found
> here<http://www.flickr.com/photos/anoopp/5706721852/in/photostream/>.)This
> image as put for deletion because it had the image of Swami
> Ayyappan<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Ayyappan>in it. Ayyappan,
> a popular god of Kerala, has his image circulated
> everywhere on the plant with no proof of copyrights. It makes sense to
> believe that this image is not eligible for copyright because
> Hindu deities are all common property, but again, Commons need proof that
> the image is in public domain. This is the same case with all Hindu
> gods/goddesses. The images can only be kept in Commons if the uploader can
> provide proof that the images are in public domain.
> - File:Kottarathil
> sankunni.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kottarathil_sankunni.jpg>:
> This is a picture of Kottarathil
> Sankunni<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kottarathil_Sankunni>,
> the author of the famous book
> Aithiyamaala<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aithihyamala>.
> Kottarathil Sankunni died in 1937 and so it makes sense to believe that this
> image was created on or before 1937 and thus falls in Public Domain. But
> some people in Commons is refusing to believe that and is asking for proof.
> Now it becomes the responsibility of the uploader to show proof that this
> image was published 60 years before today. The editor who nominated the
> image for deletion is on the safer side because it is not his responsibility
> to prove that the image is a copyright violation. So long story short,
> anyone can nominate any image for copyright violation and it becomes the
> uploaders responsibility to prove that its not. The deletion nomination need
> not be accompanied with a reason for disbelief.
> - File:Anoop
> Menon.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anoop_Menon.jpg>:
> This is the picture of Anoop
> Menon<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anoop_Menon>,
> a popular actor from Kerala. A discussion is going on about the uploaders
> credibility whether he is the original photographer of this image. Please
> see File talk:Anoop
> Menon.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Anoop_Menon.jpg>.
> The reason for doubting the uploader is simple. This image has professional
> quality and so the uploader cannot be the copyright owner because this is
> his first upload. Strange? Now, it becomes the responsibility of the
> uploader to prove that he took this image and I do not know how and nor does
> the person who is arguing for it. He claims that the uploader can upload the
> full resolution image with EXIF but whats even funny is that most of images
> from the person who is saying this does not meet this criteria. Again, back
> to round 1 in my first example. Its the responsibility of the uploader to
> prove his image and anyone can doubt him for any stupid reason and commons
> hardly cares.
>
> As you can see, it is getting quite difficult to maintain images from India
> in commons. India is a country which has only started to use Internet less
> than a decade ago and we still do not have many of our countries' books or
> sources of information online. So any image from India which gets nominated
> for deletion in Wikimedia Commons get deleted for absence of proof. Commons
> is ruled by *precautionary principle*, where in they are not willing to take
> any risks on copyright and will delete any image for which anyone has
> doubts. This is in contrary to local wikipedia projects in India where it is
> rules by the *good faith principle* where we will trust the uploader and it
> becomes the responsibility of the nominator to prove that the image has
> false copyright claim.
>
> This issue is beginning to hurt the contents from India. If we can do
> something, its time we act immediately. If we are just going to just spent
> out time discussing about it, the pictures of all Hindu gods and people who
> died before independence might get deleted by that time.
>
> Regards,
> Sreejith K.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/attachments/20110510/c986b84c/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 16:37:12 +0530
> From: Bala Jeyaraman <sodabottle at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Fwd: Copyright problems of images from
> India
> To: Wikimedia India Community list
> <wikimediaindia-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <BANLkTi=S8U-55_EmShLVOgWbNJbnT=TeJA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> 1) >>Ayyappan, a popular god of Kerala, has his image circulated everywhere
> on the plant with no proof of copyrights. It makes sense to believe that
> this image is not eligible for copyright because Hindu deities are all
> common property,
>
> i have to disagree with this. All images of Hindu deities are not public
> property. Most of the popular images were done by painters some time in the
> immediate past - Ravi varma's paintings form the base for many deity images.
> Similarly there are many unknown temple artists, who have gone uncredite
> because of our practice of gross insensitivity to others' copyright.
> Claiming that deity images are not eligible for copyright is wrong. They do
> have copyright and unless there is iron clad proof of publication, dont
> decalre them to be in public domain. The fairuse clause is there for cases
> like this.
>
>
> 2) While i understand what sreejith is saying, repeated copyright violations
> in commons by Indian uploaders is mainly to blame for this backlash. In Ta
> wiki and in commons, i have to repeat many times to people that "everything
> that comes out of google image search is not free". In my experience, about
> half the people react defensively to such advice and reflexively claim the
> image is "own work" and they "took it". They do not like being pointed out
> they are wrong and thus damage the reputation of Indian uploaders further.
> Many of the regular commons users thus become immediately suspicious when a
> new indian user claims that an image is "own work". Even in the outreach
> programs i participated, people listen to me drone about how taking images
> of google image search is not ok and do the same the immediately after. This
> issue is not restricted to Indian users, but is a major problem for us. The
> only way to deal with this is a relentless copyright awareness campaign for
> Indian users.
>
> 3) Images of people who died prior to 1951. Here too the case is not clear.
> Many photos of such people are reconstructive work done post-1951.
> Colourisation of black and white pictures is a major concern. I am still not
> clear, if colourisation passes the originality threshold and becomes a
> original work on its own. If so, then such a work cannot be claimed as PD.
>
> Personally i add a ton of descriptive information and long arguments to
> prove PD in india and in case of my own images, i always upload with full
> resolution and metadata. It is a sad bad situation, but the root cause is
> relative ignorance of Indians (including me) about copyright.
>
> regards
> Bala
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Shiju Alex <shijualexonline at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I am forwarding the below mail on behalf of a Malayalam wikipedian who is
> > very active in Wikimedia Commons.
> >
> > Of late it is becoming very difficult for many Wikimedians from India to
> > contribute to Wikimedia Commons especially if they are uploading historical
> > images which are in PD. We are facing lot of issues (and many a times
> > unnecessary controversies also) with the historic images in PD, images of
> > wall paintings and statues, and so on. Please see the below mail in which
> > Sreejith citing various examples.
> >
> > It is almost impossible for the uploaders from India to show proof of the
> > century old images of Hindu Gods and Goddesses. The current policies of
> > Commons are not permitting many of the PD images from India citing all sorts
> > of policies which might be relevant only in the western world. With these
> > type of policies we are going to have serious issues when we try to go for
> > GLAM type events.
> >
> > But I also do not know the solution for this issue. Requesting constructive
> > discussion.
> >
> >
> > Shiju Alex
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Sreejith K. <sreejithk2000 at gmail.com>
> > Date: Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:03 PM
> > Subject: Copyright problems of images from India
> > To: Shiju Alex <shijualexonline at gmail.com>
> >
> >
> > Shiju,
> >
> > As you might be aware already, we are having trouble keeping historical
> > images about India in Wikimedia commons. This pertains mostly to images
> > about Hindu gods and people who died before 1947.
> >
> > Please see the below examples:
> >
> > - File:Narayana Guru.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Narayana_Guru.jpg> -
> > This is the image of Sree Narayana Guru<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana_Guru>,
> > a Hindu saint, social reformer and is even considered a god by certain
> > castes in Kerala. This image has been tagged as an image with No source.
> > Narayana Guru expired in 1928 and considering the conditions in which India
> > was in during that period and before, it is very difficult to get an image
> > source online. Most active Wikipedians does not have access or information
> > on how old the image is or where a source of it can be found. Any photograph
> > published before 1941 in India is in public domain as per Indian copyright
> > act. Common sense says that this image meets this criteria because the
> > person was long lead before 1941, but we still need proof of the first
> > publishing date. Deleting this image on grounds that no source could be
> > found will only reduce the informative values of all the articles which this
> > image is included in.
> > - File:Aravana.JPG: This image has already been deleted, but you can
> > see the amount of discussion that went in before deleting it. See Commons:Deletion
> > requests/File:Aravana.JPG<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Aravana.JPG>.
> > (An almost similar image can be found here<http://www.flickr.com/photos/anoopp/5706721852/in/photostream/>.)This
> > image as put for deletion because it had the image of Swami Ayyappan<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Ayyappan>in it. Ayyappan, a popular god of Kerala, has his image circulated
> > everywhere on the plant with no proof of copyrights. It makes sense to
> > believe that this image is not eligible for copyright because
> > Hindu deities are all common property, but again, Commons need proof that
> > the image is in public domain. This is the same case with all Hindu
> > gods/goddesses. The images can only be kept in Commons if the uploader can
> > provide proof that the images are in public domain.
> > - File:Kottarathil sankunni.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kottarathil_sankunni.jpg>:
> > This is a picture of Kottarathil Sankunni<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kottarathil_Sankunni>,
> > the author of the famous book Aithiyamaala<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aithihyamala>.
> > Kottarathil Sankunni died in 1937 and so it makes sense to believe that this
> > image was created on or before 1937 and thus falls in Public Domain. But
> > some people in Commons is refusing to believe that and is asking for proof.
> > Now it becomes the responsibility of the uploader to show proof that this
> > image was published 60 years before today. The editor who nominated the
> > image for deletion is on the safer side because it is not his responsibility
> > to prove that the image is a copyright violation. So long story short,
> > anyone can nominate any image for copyright violation and it becomes the
> > uploaders responsibility to prove that its not. The deletion nomination need
> > not be accompanied with a reason for disbelief.
> > - File:Anoop Menon.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anoop_Menon.jpg>:
> > This is the picture of Anoop Menon<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anoop_Menon>,
> > a popular actor from Kerala. A discussion is going on about the uploaders
> > credibility whether he is the original photographer of this image. Please
> > see File talk:Anoop Menon.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Anoop_Menon.jpg>.
> > The reason for doubting the uploader is simple. This image has professional
> > quality and so the uploader cannot be the copyright owner because this is
> > his first upload. Strange? Now, it becomes the responsibility of the
> > uploader to prove that he took this image and I do not know how and nor does
> > the person who is arguing for it. He claims that the uploader can upload the
> > full resolution image with EXIF but whats even funny is that most of images
> > from the person who is saying this does not meet this criteria. Again, back
> > to round 1 in my first example. Its the responsibility of the uploader to
> > prove his image and anyone can doubt him for any stupid reason and commons
> > hardly cares.
> >
> > As you can see, it is getting quite difficult to maintain images from India
> > in commons. India is a country which has only started to use Internet less
> > than a decade ago and we still do not have many of our countries' books or
> > sources of information online. So any image from India which gets nominated
> > for deletion in Wikimedia Commons get deleted for absence of proof. Commons
> > is ruled by *precautionary principle*, where in they are not willing to
> > take any risks on copyright and will delete any image for which anyone has
> > doubts. This is in contrary to local wikipedia projects in India where it is
> > rules by the *good faith principle* where we will trust the uploader and
> > it becomes the responsibility of the nominator to prove that the image has
> > false copyright claim.
> >
> > This issue is beginning to hurt the contents from India. If we can do
> > something, its time we act immediately. If we are just going to just spent
> > out time discussing about it, the pictures of all Hindu gods and people who
> > died before independence might get deleted by that time.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Sreejith K.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaindia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
> >
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/attachments/20110510/06d99b92/attachment.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>
>
> End of Wikimediaindia-l Digest, Vol 35, Issue 16
> ************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/attachments/20110510/10f2ffca/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the Wikimediaindia-l
mailing list