ps. for my proposal see; http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sexual_content#Proposal_3_-_Model_ages.2C_releases.2C_and_personality_rights
pps. the general reception for that particular proposal was that I'm a bit of a crazy person. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:39 PM, private musings <thepmacco...@gmail.com>wrote: > Here are some pointers to commons discussions; > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Nudity > - the commons policy on nudity, more focused on whether or not content is > useful than things like permissions. > > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people > - mentions 'moral issues', but media generated from a distance can (and > are) argued to be non identifiable. This guideline would further seem not to > apply to material which doesn't feature the face (upskirt, downblouse, > closeup of boob etc.) > > Further - the rationale for the outcome of a discussion is often rather > unpredictable - see > > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Beach_in_Italy_(302214719).jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Beach_in_Italy_%28302214719%29.jpg> > > for a beach shot which was deleted, and > > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Topless_Barcelona.jpg > > for a beach shot which was kept. > > It's my view that the later image should be deleted. Thoughts? > > best, > > Peter, > PM. > > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Last post on this thread. >> >> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 5:38 PM, private musings <thepmacco...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > There are many shots clearly 'posed' - which I personally feel means >> that >> > permission is clearly granted by the subject - however there are also >> many >> > which don't indicate that the subject has any idea the image is being >> > captured. >> >> Where on Commons is the best place to discuss this? I haven't seen >> anything that looks like a very good processlist for checking that an >> image has a model release... though I reckon there's a template for >> suggesting one does not. >> >> > The addition of this material to commons, and to multiple user >> > galleries (and user pages) - often with captions / titles like 'hot' or >> > 'sexy' I feel is at best crass, and at worst an embarrassment to the >> >> I don't see anything wrong with calling encyclopedic or otherwise >> useful, release images, hot or sexy, or with making galleries out of >> them. you can leave out this tangent. >> >> >> > I believe it's desirable to respect the subjects of photography >> featuring >> > nudity to the degree that no matter what the copyright status of the >> image, >> > permission of the subject is in some way assessed, and if found wanting >> - >> > the media should be deleted. >> >> I don't think copyright has anything to do with this; again you can >> leave out that comment entirely. Permission of subject should be >> assessed, period. If you assess it by saying 'it is from a library >> archive and is 80 yrs old', that works as a first pass. >> >> SJ >> >> >> An aside on work-safety: >> >> Earlier, John wrote: >> > While creating software would be needed for a good solution, I think >> > we can create a simple solution by renaming all images with nudity so >> > that they begin with NSFW (not safe for work), as I mentioned here: >> >> I don't think this is a good idea in the slightest. >> I know I mentioned NSFW before, and I meant it in a totally different >> context. What I was suggesting is: >> - pages which might be unexpectedly come across (name and context >> don't give away media content) and are considered NSFW by a reasonable >> minority of people should have some indication on the page [not on the >> images]. >> >> It's not meaningful to look for consensus on what is SFW or NSFW, and >> media cannot be SFW or NSFW without context. [for any given image or >> block of text, there is some workplace where it is appropriate if not >> commonplace] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> foundation-l mailing list >> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >> > > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l