The CC-BY-SA license asks for a basic courtesy: You give an acknowledgement to the person who graciously let you use their work totally free.
It takes all of five seconds to add "Photo by ___________" to a caption. It takes very little more to add a note that the photo is CC licensed. I can see why people are a bit put out when someone won't do these very minimal things in exchange for a rich library of free (as in speech and beer) material. Todd On Mar 1, 2017 10:44 PM, "rupert THURNER" <rupert.thur...@gmail.com> wrote: > on the german wikipedia there was a poll to ban images of users who > send cease and desist letters, triggered by a recent case of thomas > wolf trying to charge 1200 euro out of a tiny non-profit which > improperly reused one of his images [1]. thomas article work includs > "improving text deserts, and changing bad images to (often his own) > better quality images"[2]. there is a broad majority against people > who use cease and desist letters as a business model. anyway a small > number of persons do have such a business model, some of them even > administrators on commons, like alexander savin [3][4]. > > but the topic of course is much more subtle than described above, the > discussion was heated, and the result close - as always in the last 10 > years. a digital divide between persons supporting the original > mindset of wikipedia which sees every additional reuse, unrestricted, > as success, and the ones who think it is not desired to incorrectly > reference, or feel that others should not make money out of their > work. > > as both are viable opinions would it be possible to split commons in > two, for every opinion? the new commons would include safe licenses > like cc-4.0 and users who are friendly to update their licenses to > better ones in future. the old commons would just stay as it is. a > user of wikipedia can easy distinguish if she wants to include both > sources, or only one of them? there is only one goal: make cease and > desist letters as business model not interesting any more, > technically, while keeping the morale of contributors high, both > sides. > > [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/ > keine_Bilder_in_Artikelnamensraum_von_direkt_abmahnenden_Fotografen > [2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Der_Wolf_im_Wald > [3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:A.Savin > [4] https://tarnkappe.info/ausgesprochen-peinlich-abmahnfalle-wikipedia- > interview-mit-simplicius/ > > best > rupert > > _______________________________________________ > 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-requ...@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-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
