User talk:Dmgerman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A person claiming to be you [1] mentioned on Slashdot.org that you believed that the image Image:Limonadedmg.jpg was not licensed with the GFDL but only with the CC-SA license. As the Slashdot post illustrated, that makes life difficult for reusers, who can't expect that the GFDL license will be sufficient. To avoid this, the upload agreement makes all uploads by the creator GFDL licensesd in addition to any other licenses the uploader may wish to grant.

Please either confirm that you are willing to grant a GFDL license or, at your option, either list it for deletion (wrong license) or let me know so that I can do so. We've no interest at all in compelling you to license it in a way contrary to your wishes but are trying to maintain some consistency for reusers.

The Commons project does accept a broader range of images and you may wish to consider placing it there instead if you don't wish to grant a GFDL license but do still want to make it available for others to use.

You should also consider that your work is arguably a derivative work of the tent design, the logo on the tent and the design of the lemonade squeezer. For that reason, while you may be releasing your portion of the work under one license, you may be making fair use of the work of others, making the combined work fair use. Fair use is not accepted at Commons. It is accepted at en.wikipedia.org but that would require the GFDL license in addition to any others.

Thanks for your assistance in resolving the licensing misunderstanding. Jamesday 11:09, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

James,

Thank you for taking the time to reply to my post. You raise very interesting issues, and at the core, in my opinion, is the issue of credit to the author. I checked the GFDL and it seems to imply that the user of the content should give credit to the author of the work. The wikipedia does this very well by allowing us to check the history of a document or an image.

But answers.com does not do it at all. They copy the content without giving any indication of who the author is. I would believe that this is contradictory to the spirit of the GFDL.

I agree with you that there is a potential issue of the value of this image as derivative work. But I have other images in the wikipedia that do not have this problem (see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Straig_of_georgia.jpg ).

Answers.com is giving credit to the Wikipedia, but no the original creator.

What is your opinion?

daniel

Hello. I was image tagging, when I came across Image:Hair.jpg. I was unable to determine the copyright status, so I tagged it as "unverified". Could you add a proper image copyright tag to it? Pictures without tags will eventually be deleted. Thanks, Datepalm17 11:10, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)