Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

In many (most?) legal jurisdictions, no release is required if you're in a place where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]] On Aug 12, 2016 1:43 AM, "Neotarf" wrote: > Some comment on Lane Rasberry's "model release" question: first it seems

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

Some comment on Lane Rasberry's "model release" question: first it seems from the supporting essays, the underlying purpose of a "model release" is legal protection for a photographer selling photographs, which wouldn't apply to Commons. The "model" terminology is somehow not quite right for the

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image (Neotarf)

As far as consent, I have only seen two types of medical consent forms. One is a consent to treatment when the client first enters the system. No provider will treat someone without that. There are also specialized consent forms for various procedures, to show that the client has received

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

One way to obscure the face is, if you're not trying to illustrate facial features of certain genetic conditions, to crop the face out entirely. Also, I think the concern is more "Are the parents of the kids aware that the picture is on Wikipedia and are they okay with it?", and not copyright. I

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

The image was removed by Doc James with the edit summary "Prior person had a lot more than marfans" ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

e > participation of women within Wikimedia projects." > <gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org> > Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image > Message-ID: >

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

I've started a discussion on the file talk page on Commons if anyone would like to comment. Sarah ___ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription

[Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image (Neotarf)

Regarding the Marfan syndrome image, I looked into it as well as I could. It seems to be allowed for re-use per the terms of the Creative Commons license in the source article. I changed the description of the image on Wikimedia Commons to be "13 year old female" instead of woman, but that doesn't

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

Dear Neotarf, I also had a look at the copyright surrounding the image, and agree with your analysis: * In any case the image should be CC BY 2.0 - not 2.5. Technically I think this information provides you with the information that allows us to share on Commons and beyond under the CC BY

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

One option in these cases is to anonymize the image to make the subject not immediately recognizable - one common way I see to do this is to block out the subject's eyes or blur their face. I would offer to do this but I have no idea how to work any kind of image editing program, so it would

Re: [Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

Hello, I know this issue. It does look like a mistake that the academic paper has a 2.0 license and Wikipedia tags it as 2.5. Other than that issue, the copyright seems in order. Wikimedia Commons does not have a clear policy on consent for images, other than images should comply with local law.

[Gendergap] Marfan syndrome image

Would someone look at the copyright issues surrounding the image in Marfan syndrome? This article was mentioned in the Signpost as being worked on in honor of Kevin Gorman. The image shows a pubescent child, partially clothed, apparently during a medical exam. The image was uploaded with a