Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
Hello all, An issue this raises for me is this: If we're to include copyright information on blog posts regarding the use of CC licensed images, is this going to have to be applied to all Wikipedia articles illustrated with images too? Apologies if I've missed something here. Thanks, Stevie On 22 January 2013 23:51, Michael Jahn michael.j...@wikimedia.de wrote: Hi, great question, Richard! Seconding Matthew's comment on WMF blog policy: At Wikimedia Deutschland we adopted the bottom notes for posts with multiple images[1]. As a general rule, we include attribution in the bylines[2]. Adding yet another aspect to sufficient CC licensing, let's not forget that CC deeds actually recommend linking to deeds[3], as exemplified here[4]. I particularly like Thomas' notion of not differentiating between attribution requirements for text and images. From my personal understanding of CC license terms, I agree. There is no difference, which indeed leads to the question: How to deal with authorship attribution of dozens of authors (to pick a rather simple example) under CC-BY-SA in any convincing manner? That is, convincing as in intuitive and practical use cases. I sense that this is, first of all, an issue for Creative Commons licensing politics. Best, Michael [1] see e. g. https://blog.wikimedia.de/2013/01/17/die-gesichter-hinter-den-zahlen-ein-ruckblick-auf-die-spendenkampagne-2012-2/ [2] see e. g. https://blog.wikimedia.de/2013/01/21/die-server-der-wikimedia-foundation-ziehen-um/ [3] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ [4] please follow the asterisc here http://blog.wikimedia.de/2012/06/20/zahlen-und-bilder-die-wikimania-2012-in-washington-d-c/ 2013/1/22 Matthew Roth mr...@wikimedia.org On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: All, I have a question for you which I am sure you will enjoy discussing. It's about licencing. Wikimedia sites do not use a 'byline' on their images - for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page requires an image to be clicked on before you can view the licence and the author information. The same applies for Wikipedia, and the WMF (and WMUK) blogs. Hi Richard, On the Wikimedia blog, we include Copyright notes at the bottom of each post with images and include the Title of the photo, the author's name (and link to userpage if available) and the link to the relevant license page on CC or elsewhere. See for example: http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/01/19/wikimedia-sites-move-to-primary-data-center-in-ashburn-virginia/ This process was formalized after a Commons user pointed out to us that we appeared not to be in compliance with the URI sub-clause of the CC-BY-SA license. cf sections 4 a) and 4 b) here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode Our legal team affirmed the Commons user's assertion and we have subsequently implemented the Copyright notes special field in the admin end or our blog. You can see a bit more info here on the instructions we give to post authors and editors: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Blog/Guidelines#Add_Copyright_Notes thanks, Matthew -- Matthew Roth Global Communications Manager Wikimedia Foundation +1.415.839.6885 ext 6635 www.wikimediafoundation.org *https://donate.wikimedia.org* ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Öffentlichkeitsarbeit Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstraße 72 | 10963 Berlin Tel. (030) 219 158 260 http://wikimedia.de http://www.wikimedia.de Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei! *Helfen Sie mit, dass WIKIPEDIA von der UNESCO als erstes digitales Weltkulturerbe anerkannt wird. Unterzeichnen Sie die Online-Petition:* http://wikipedia.de/wke/Main_Page?setlang=de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Stevie Benton Communications Organiser Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173 @StevieBenton Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
On 23 January 2013 10:10, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hello all, An issue this raises for me is this: If we're to include copyright information on blog posts regarding the use of CC licensed images, is this going to have to be applied to all Wikipedia articles illustrated with images too? Apologies if I've missed something here. Yes, I think Richard's initial question was about Wikipedia, etc.. The subject of blogs was just raised as an example of somewhere we sometimes take a different approach. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
On 23/01/2013 12:39, Richard Symonds wrote: My initial question was aimed to find out what sort of attribution we'd need to do on Wikimedia UK sites - eg, uk.wikimedia.org and blog.wikimedia.org. I'm not really *keen* on changing policy on Wikipedia. That's not my job! In that case just do what flickr does when someone grabs the code from the Share-Grab the HTML/BBCode link. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
On 22 January 2013 17:41, Philippe Beaudette phili...@wikimedia.org wrote: FYI, each and every edit on Commons has this text above the edit box: ...You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license. Yeah, but Commons pulls in stuff from other CC-licenced places, so we can't presume the creators have clicked said button. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
And I'm also unsure all the upload wizards have the same text? 2013/1/22 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com On 22 January 2013 17:41, Philippe Beaudette phili...@wikimedia.org wrote: FYI, each and every edit on Commons has this text above the edit box: ...You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license. Yeah, but Commons pulls in stuff from other CC-licenced places, so we can't presume the creators have clicked said button. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
I've always considered this poor policy on the part of Wikipedia; a sort of intellectual grab that we do so well :( I've uploaded images before by great photographers, after working to obtain their permission, and make a point of crediting them when inserting the image into the article - partly because it's useful to know and partly because it seems fair. Tom On 22 January 2013 17:46, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: And I'm also unsure all the upload wizards have the same text? 2013/1/22 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com On 22 January 2013 17:41, Philippe Beaudette phili...@wikimedia.org wrote: FYI, each and every edit on Commons has this text above the edit box: ...You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license. Yeah, but Commons pulls in stuff from other CC-licenced places, so we can't presume the creators have clicked said button. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: All, I have a question for you which I am sure you will enjoy discussing. It's about licencing. Wikimedia sites do not use a 'byline' on their images - for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page requires an image to be clicked on before you can view the licence and the author information. The same applies for Wikipedia, and the WMF (and WMUK) blogs. Hi Richard, On the Wikimedia blog, we include Copyright notes at the bottom of each post with images and include the Title of the photo, the author's name (and link to userpage if available) and the link to the relevant license page on CC or elsewhere. See for example: http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/01/19/wikimedia-sites-move-to-primary-data-center-in-ashburn-virginia/ This process was formalized after a Commons user pointed out to us that we appeared not to be in compliance with the URI sub-clause of the CC-BY-SA license. cf sections 4 a) and 4 b) here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode Our legal team affirmed the Commons user's assertion and we have subsequently implemented the Copyright notes special field in the admin end or our blog. You can see a bit more info here on the instructions we give to post authors and editors: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Blog/Guidelines#Add_Copyright_Notes thanks, Matthew -- Matthew Roth Global Communications Manager Wikimedia Foundation +1.415.839.6885 ext 6635 www.wikimediafoundation.org *https://donate.wikimedia.org* ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
On 22 January 2013 16:51, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: It appears that opinion is divided on whether a hyperlink is acceptable as attribution, therefore I'm asking the experts: - Does anyone have any input on this? - Has this discussion been had before, if so, where? - Should Wikipedia, Commons and the various Wikimedia sites use the full byline, or are we OK just using a hyperlink? If we need to have bylines for images, surely we need them for text as well? It's been discussed hundreds of times before, as you can imagine. I'm not aware of any particular conclusions being reached, other than no-one caring enough to get the status quo changed. The issue of us taking freely licenced content from other sources is potentially more of an issue. When you submit something, you agree to be attributed through a link to the Wikipedia article, but when you import something the author has made no such agreement. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
On 22/01/2013 18:28, Thomas Dalton wrote: On 22 January 2013 16:51, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: It appears that opinion is divided on whether a hyperlink is acceptable as attribution, therefore I'm asking the experts: - Does anyone have any input on this? - Has this discussion been had before, if so, where? - Should Wikipedia, Commons and the various Wikimedia sites use the full byline, or are we OK just using a hyperlink? If we need to have bylines for images, surely we need them for text as well? It's been discussed hundreds of times before, as you can imagine. I'm not aware of any particular conclusions being reached, other than no-one caring enough to get the status quo changed. The issue of us taking freely licenced content from other sources is potentially more of an issue. When you submit something, you agree to be attributed through a link to the Wikipedia article, but when you import something the author has made no such agreement. Commons may have related issues where they clone out a copyright watermark. If nothing else it is likely to aggravate the content creator and in the case of one German archive resulted in them saying that after donating 80,000 images they weren't donating any more images to Commons because of it. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
2013/1/22 ??? wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk: On 22/01/2013 18:28, Thomas Dalton wrote: On 22 January 2013 16:51, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: It appears that opinion is divided on whether a hyperlink is acceptable as attribution, therefore I'm asking the experts: - Does anyone have any input on this? - Has this discussion been had before, if so, where? - Should Wikipedia, Commons and the various Wikimedia sites use the full byline, or are we OK just using a hyperlink? If we need to have bylines for images, surely we need them for text as well? It's been discussed hundreds of times before, as you can imagine. I'm not aware of any particular conclusions being reached, other than no-one caring enough to get the status quo changed. The issue of us taking freely licenced content from other sources is potentially more of an issue. When you submit something, you agree to be attributed through a link to the Wikipedia article, but when you import something the author has made no such agreement. Commons may have related issues where they clone out a copyright watermark. If nothing else it is likely to aggravate the content creator and in the case of one German archive resulted in them saying that after donating 80,000 images they weren't donating any more images to Commons because of it. That's a very simplified description of what happened. See e.g https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-11-22/News_and_notes ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Licencing question
Hi, great question, Richard! Seconding Matthew's comment on WMF blog policy: At Wikimedia Deutschland we adopted the bottom notes for posts with multiple images[1]. As a general rule, we include attribution in the bylines[2]. Adding yet another aspect to sufficient CC licensing, let's not forget that CC deeds actually recommend linking to deeds[3], as exemplified here[4]. I particularly like Thomas' notion of not differentiating between attribution requirements for text and images. From my personal understanding of CC license terms, I agree. There is no difference, which indeed leads to the question: How to deal with authorship attribution of dozens of authors (to pick a rather simple example) under CC-BY-SA in any convincing manner? That is, convincing as in intuitive and practical use cases. I sense that this is, first of all, an issue for Creative Commons licensing politics. Best, Michael [1] see e. g. https://blog.wikimedia.de/2013/01/17/die-gesichter-hinter-den-zahlen-ein-ruckblick-auf-die-spendenkampagne-2012-2/ [2] see e. g. https://blog.wikimedia.de/2013/01/21/die-server-der-wikimedia-foundation-ziehen-um/ [3] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ [4] please follow the asterisc here http://blog.wikimedia.de/2012/06/20/zahlen-und-bilder-die-wikimania-2012-in-washington-d-c/ 2013/1/22 Matthew Roth mr...@wikimedia.org On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: All, I have a question for you which I am sure you will enjoy discussing. It's about licencing. Wikimedia sites do not use a 'byline' on their images - for example, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page requires an image to be clicked on before you can view the licence and the author information. The same applies for Wikipedia, and the WMF (and WMUK) blogs. Hi Richard, On the Wikimedia blog, we include Copyright notes at the bottom of each post with images and include the Title of the photo, the author's name (and link to userpage if available) and the link to the relevant license page on CC or elsewhere. See for example: http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/01/19/wikimedia-sites-move-to-primary-data-center-in-ashburn-virginia/ This process was formalized after a Commons user pointed out to us that we appeared not to be in compliance with the URI sub-clause of the CC-BY-SA license. cf sections 4 a) and 4 b) here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode Our legal team affirmed the Commons user's assertion and we have subsequently implemented the Copyright notes special field in the admin end or our blog. You can see a bit more info here on the instructions we give to post authors and editors: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Blog/Guidelines#Add_Copyright_Notes thanks, Matthew -- Matthew Roth Global Communications Manager Wikimedia Foundation +1.415.839.6885 ext 6635 www.wikimediafoundation.org *https://donate.wikimedia.org* ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Öffentlichkeitsarbeit Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstraße 72 | 10963 Berlin Tel. (030) 219 158 260 http://wikimedia.de http://www.wikimedia.de Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei! *Helfen Sie mit, dass WIKIPEDIA von der UNESCO als erstes digitales Weltkulturerbe anerkannt wird. Unterzeichnen Sie die Online-Petition:* http://wikipedia.de/wke/Main_Page?setlang=de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
