Wikipedia talk:Example requests for permission

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

I have problems with this line: "If you agree, we will credit you for your work in the resulting article's references section ..."

...where is an article with a "references section"? I could not find any example yet. I tried also to read the Wikipedia:Cite_your_sources but the discussion confused me more then helping...

I just send this "request for permission" to the author of the Whippet article, and I got the "ok" as an email. Where do I put now this "ok" or the authors name???

Thanks for help, Fantasy 15:09 Apr 25, 2003 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Too friendly

This request not only sounds too friendly, but im not sure if it portrays the sender as "professional." I dont know if the request is purposely written this way for individuals with homepages. Mabye there could be a link to a "Boilerplate for larger organizations," which sounds more professional and doesnt start "Hey I really liked your website." Greenmountainboy 14:04, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

  • Indeed. I find the introductory portion of the text as... almost juvenile. Way too informal, in any case. -- Fennec
  • Indeed, i had to write my own to send to a goverment website. -- Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 06:28, 2004 Jul 21 (UTC)
  • I agree, This current text is not usable for large organizations, which are likely to have the images we want. [[User:Cohesion|cohesion ☎]] 19:08, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Going to edit this a bit

I also am not happy with the tone of this email. I'm going to try some bold edits -- please feel free to discuss or edit in return. This needs some collaborative effort put in on it. Catherine 06:28, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I've done it -- comments welcome!

I like it. Made a minor edit that seemed to indicate that Wikipedia was in the public domain. --mav 08:02, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)


[edit] More work done

Been tweaking the Text version today -- I hope that it sounds reasonably polished and coherent. Some specific areas I'd like feedback on:

I am seeking your permission to use the text you have written, either directly, or as a reference for my original writing on the subject.

I know we don't need permission to use the site as a reference for factual information (since facts can't be copyrighted), as long as we're not copying text verbatim, or copying creative presentation. It seemed a courtesy to mention that we might use it as a reference if they didn't like us using their text directly, but the more I think about it, the more this gives them the option of saying "no, don't use my site as a reference, either", which would leave us in the position of having to explain that facts can't be copyrighted, arguing with and disenchanting a potential contributor, and appearing 'grabby' about something they worked hard to create and present. Our only other alternative would be not to use info at all from a site that was good enough to prompt the request for permission in the first place.

Perhaps something like: I am seeking your permission to use some or all of the text that you have written. We would be delighted to hear an answer of "yes", and we will happily respect an answer of "no". A third alternative would be for you to use your talents to compose new text on the subject which would not be the same as copyrighted material on your website you might wish to protect. Our final alternative would be for our editors to write an original article on the subject, properly citing your work as an academic resource and providing a link to your site.

I feel it may be getting too long already, but I want to make the benefits and "risks" as clear as possible. Any ideas for tightening, rearranging or polishing the text are welcome!

This means that although you retain the copyright and authorship of your own work, you are granting permission for all others (not just Wikipedia) to use, copy, and share your materials freely -- and even potentially use them commercially -- so long as they do not try to claim the copyright themselves, or try to prevent others from using or copying them freely.

I fear this section might gain us a lot of "no" answers, especially the commercial part, but I think it's important to make this clear to contributors from the start, especially with a potential print editions coming in the future -- anyone who thinks they're just donating to a "non-profit website" and ends up seeing their words or photos in a book may feel they have a legal bone to pick with us.

Which reminds me that we should probably mention our non-profit status somewhere in the letter....

Please be assured that if permission is not granted, your <copyrighted?/original?> materials will *not* be used at Wikipedia -- we have a very strict policy against copyright violations.

Again, this seemed courteous, but may not be necessary. If you think it is helpful, should we use "copyrighted", "original", or something else? Again, I was trying to imply that we might still use the facts there, just not their copyrighted presentation of it.

<You are obviously <very interested/an expert> in your field, and we invite your active collaboration in writing and editing articles on this subject and any others that might be attractive to you. If you are interested, please see:
 http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Welcome%2C_newcomers for more information!>

Optional section; I've just run into some people who would make great contributors, and wanted a simple text for inviting the to actively join us. Is there a better/cleaner link to a welcome/entry page? That one's a little ugly....

Thank you for your time.

Kindly, <WIKIPEDIA AUTHOR> LOL -- Catherine 00:44, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Copyright Permission

What is the preferred method for an author to indicate that he/she is giving permission to use material. I asked an author to add such a statement to ACORN but couldn't say exactly how to do it. Rmhermen 16:25, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] The "Another proposition"

I like this text as was going to use it to request an image. I sent the resulting text to myself first and noticed that our company spamfilter tagged it as SPAM with 7 points (5+ is regarded as spam). It seems to get 2 points alone for using "Dear...". -- Solitude 14:57, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Request for help

Hi, a new user (User:Raj2004) asked me for help with contacting a website or some such in regards to quotations. They might very well be fair use for all I know. Any help is appreciated. Here is a link to his request on my talk: User_talk:Sam_Spade#Dvaita_and_Visatadvaita. I will direct him here, and a couple other places (like the pump, and Wikipedia:Fair use). Cheers, Sam [Spade] 18:08, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] A minor alteration

Would anyone object to all instances of replaceable text being placed inside angle brackets? When copying and pasting into a plaintext email, bold and italics are lost, and it makes it tricky to pick up with that much text. Akchizar 08:31, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Go for it -- I'm not sure when it changed to italics; this was originally meant to be very easy to copy into email. [[User:CatherineMunro|Catherine\talk]] 21:32, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Response template?

Would it make sense to provide a template at the bottom of requests for permission, for people to use to respond -- something that could then be pasted into the Talk page or Image Description page as evidence that the creator wishes to license their work? Something along the lines of this (please edit mercilessly):

IMAGES
As the creator and copyright holder of the image currently named <TITLE.EXT>
(found at <URL> as of this date), I hereby licence said image under the GFDL,
as a contribution to Wikimedia and its downstream users."
<NAME>, <DATE>

TEXT
As the creator and copyright holder of the text found at <URL> as of this date,
I hereby licence said text under the GFDL, as a contribution to Wikimedia and
its downstream users."
<NAME>, <DATE>

As the creator and copyright holder of the text found at <URL> as of this date,
I hereby licence that portion of the text included in this email under the GFDL,
as a contribution to Wikimedia and its downstream users."
<NAME>, <DATE>, <TEXT>

Please comment -- this ought to be legal and bulletproof, and I'm no copyright expert. [[User:CatherineMunro|Catherine\talk]] 21:32, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Special Terms?

In the Informal (images) boilerplate:

If you would prefer more restrictive terms (for example, limiting use of specific images to Wikimedia Foundation Inc. only), we will be happy to accommodate requests within our ability to fulfill them. Should this be the case, please contact Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales at jwales@bomis.com.

What does this mean? I'm new to Wikipedia, and I'm trying to get permission from a photographer to use their photos. Everything I've read recently (most of the copyright links here...) suggests that "copyrighted with permission only for Wikipedia" material is no longer being kept. Is this paragraph from the boilerplate no longer applicable? Am I missing something?

I don't think GNU-FDL is going to fly with this person since he sells his images. He has allowed them to appear on Astronomy Picture of the Day and has given me permission to use them on Wikipedia, but that was before I noticed that such permission-granted material is going away/no longer wanted. Is there no place on Wikipedia for such material? --mh

[edit] Another email

I won't put this on the main page myself, but here's something I used for an email.

Hiya.  Quick question about <<COMPANY>> images:

I'm starting to write an article on Wikipedia, an internet encyclopaedia, 
about <<COMPANY>>.  I wondered if you had any images which we might use to 
illustrate the article?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/<<COMPANY>>

It would be ideal if you could consider releasing an image such that it can 
be used without restriction by other projects ('GNU Free Documentation 
License' or similar), but any offer to let Wikipedia use an image would be 
great.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License

There's more information on what Wikipedia is about, if you'd like to have 
a browse, and you're welcome to make changes yourself of course.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia

Best regards

<<NAME>>

Ojw 23:05, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ban on images with restrictive licenses announced

There is a new policy on unfree images, detailed here: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-05-23/Noncommercial images. The "images letter" in this project page states that the GFDL is the preferred license, but implies that other options are available. Those other options have now narrowed substantially. It would be helpeful if these letters are reviewed and edited to comply with the latest policies. Thanks, -Willmcw 01:46, May 24, 2005 (UTC) (someone who will not be doing that job)

[edit] Suggestion for "another proposition"

I phrased the part marked [where?]? as follows: "If that is the case, could you kindly post the following statement on the page in question." and added the following at the end "License Statement: The above text is available under the GNU Free Documentation License, a copy of which is available at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html." This might be a good way to do it... JesseW 7 July 2005 06:42 (UTC)

[edit] Model letters need slight re-casting

I think they should be as simple and short as possible—like, three-quarters of their current length. The danger is always that a busy recipient will put it aside unless the message is easy and quick to digest.

May I suggest that these models include a subject title at the top (an attention grabber), and that even the formal letters use contractives such as "won't". I think that in some respects the language of these letters can be friendly and formal at the same time.

Tony 05:24, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Could you draft one? User:Nichalp/sg 06:50, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Another suggested format: Stiffly-formal, Impolite, Rambling, Stentorian, and Anonymous

(Comments welcome.)

Date

City

EYES ONLY

BY REGISTERED AND CERTIFIED MAIL

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Dear sir or madam,

I am highly honored (ahem) to have the privilege of establishing an emissarial relationship with your person, on behalf of a world-wide, soon-to-be-authoritative, group of Web-based Wiki scholars (just shut up for a second -- I'll explain more about Wiki in a moment, if you please -- beg pardon) with the noble purpose of documenting every shred of human information, however trifling, and disseminating it to all God's creatures, with a complete revision history, editorial comments, and a transcript of all on-line disputes, allegations, and arbitration attempts within the cult-like, highly-evolved community that created it. I am its Editor.

Please allow me to introduce myself. I will begin: I am an unemployed office worker in New York City, living in fashionable Kew Gardens, Queens, on a quiet tree-lined street. Although I intend to take another position in the administrative arts in the near future, I would one day like to break into show business. Perhaps one day you will know my name. For now I'm on the Internet a lot, and rent is in arrears, but duty calls.

Now that I have your attention, I am pleased to inform you that you have been pre-selected to receive the distinct honor of being asked to release something that belongs to you into world-wide use by anyone who damn well wants it. Plus, they can change it. You may or may not be credited, but if you are and your name is spelled correctly, perhaps you too will become famous like I hope to be, and show up on Internet search engines among the first ten results. In other words, I'll Google you if you Google me, wink-wink, nudge-nudge, say no more.

Our project is extremely important, so please respond before four o'clock this afternoon, as this article is going to be nominated as a featured article, and I have some shopping to do. Mostly groceries, but if I can get to the bank before three that would be nice. It's my local branch, just around the corner, so that shouldn't be a problem (like you care).

What we want is the photograph on your blog, that you took of your next-door-neighbor Mindie Schultz, who auditioned to appear last year on a reality television show (working title: HOUSE FULL OF CRAZY BRAZILIAN ASS-KISSERS) which is currently in workshop and hopefully one day pitched to UPN. I understand you are a member of Mindie's fan club. Get a life. I mean, really. (Do you have her number?)

I am going to create a new page called Mindie Schultz to announced her intentions to appear on HFOCBAK, a note about her childhood, and her favorite bread (pita). It will provide complete documentation, including a link to her Yahoo! Group, to UPN's site, and my original research. Although I can't imagine it will, there is a slight possibility it will be nominated for deletion, in which case I could use as many Keep votes as you can manage. Watch the page (a Bureaucrat or Admin can show you how). You have a few days, you'll be able to vote quite a few times. Forty will probably be enough. Make sure they're all registered through different accounts.

Please visit our Web site (it's called "Wikkaapedia, the on-line Pictionary" -- you can find it on a Google search), go the page about copyrights (if you have trouble I suggest you register, log-in, and leave some requests for help on various talk pages -- you'll figure it out), read the stuff about copyrights, select the proper tag, insert it between the two funny-looking squiggly-type-deals that appear above the left and right brackets on your keyboard, and upload it. There's quite a learning curve at Wikkapedia, so I suggest you set aside the afternoon.

Please realize that we are doing YOU a favor, so get right on this so we can continue with our reseach.

A. Friend

(Oh, if you do stick around, leave a note on my talk page. But don't edit my stuff.)


Too friendly. Otherwise OK. pumpkin97 10:34 Aug 31, 2005 (UTC)
Amusing, but too many in-jokes. I fear this would confuse and mislead anyone who wasn't already familiar with Wikipedia. But then I have been unsuccessful so far at getting permission letters answered, so what do I know? Bovlb 15:09:45, 2005-08-31 (UTC)

[edit] Greatly simplified request needed.

A greatly simplified format needs for buisness people who are busy or people who speak english as a second language. The format to be 2 short paragraphs, very simple wording, no conractions, etc. I am using a form of this email presently:

"I would like to add an article about your XXproductXXpaperXXwhateverXX too Wikipeida. Wikipedia is a collective effort by thousands of people to create an internet encyclopedia. Anyone can add information to an article or entirely new articles without authorization. I am willing to addXXretrofitXXX an article aboutXXXbased onXX XXXX. Anything I add must be covered under the GFDL, would you mind

I am guessing you are korean. The Korean version of Wikipedia may make more sense too you: http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/"

I am not a skilled enough writer nor a well trained wikipedian so I don't wish to attempt to make a real template.


-Indolering

[edit] American English formal

This is an adaptation of the British English version (mostly spelling changes). Please feel free to correct.

 Dear Sir or Madam
 
 I am writing to you on behalf of the Wikipedia project <http://www.wikipedia.org/>,
 an endeavor to build a fully-fledged multilingual encyclopedia in an entirely open
 manner, to ask for permission to use your copyrighted material.
 
 Your organization has on its website content which would undoubtedly enhance
 communication with our target audience; in order to do so, I should like to ask for
 your authorization to use such content, namely the [photograph|illustration|etc]
 located at [URL], under the terms of Wikipedia's license.
 
 Wikipedia licenses all its content under the license developed for purposes of free
 documentation by the Free Software Foundation, the text of which can be found at
 <http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html>. It should be borne in mind that if you
 choose to allow Wikipedia to use the stated [photograph|illustration|etc], it will
 remain copyrighted to you; however, the said license stipulates that third parties
 must be permitted to reuse the licensed work so long that they retain the license of
 this work and any derivatives from it. Consequently, you may wish to consider
 carefully whether you are prepared to compromise some of your rights granted to
 you by copyright law by licensing your work as suggested.
 
 That said, allow me to reiterate that your material will be used to the noble end of
 providing a free collection of knowledge for everyone; naturally enough, only if you
 agree. If that is the case, could you kindly fill in the attached form and post it to
 [where?]? We shall greatly appreciate it.
 
 Thank you for your time and consideration.
 
 I look forward to your reply.
 
 Yours faithfully
 [name surname]

Wikiacc (talk) 00:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Confirmation of permission

Hi everyone - I just noticed. This page contains contradictory instructions relative to the WP:CP page. On WP:CP once we have permission we send an email to permission at wikimedia dot com and put {{Confirmation}} on the talk page. We don't list things on Wikipedia:Successful requests for permission, which seems an unnecessarily redundant step. But, of course, I'm glad to change my mind :) --best, kevin └KZOLLMAN/TALK┐ 02:06, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Casual request for images?

There isn't a boilerplate for a casual request for images - the current casual boilerplate seems to be for text. Andjam 12:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Impreciseness in informal image request?

This means that although you retain the copyright and authorship of your own work, you are granting permission for all others (not just Wikipedia) to use, copy, and share your materials freely

Does "your materials" sound a bit ambiguous, as if it's suggesting every work by the requestee would be made available (whereas the requestee has the option of licensing some but not all of his/hers images)? How about "the licenced materials"? Andjam 12:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Version of "Casual" in Tajik

There is a version of the "Casual" letter in Tajik that can be found courtesy of tg:User:Ibrahim here. Should it be linked, is there a page for multi-lingual versions ? - FrancisTyers · 14:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No permission requests for Public Domain

The provided examples only mention requests for releasing an image under the GNU Free Documentation License or a Creative Commons license. This Wikipedia:Finding_images_tutorial page also talks about releasing an image in the public domain. Shouldn't this be included as an option? Prodoc 11:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Real Examples

If anyone is interested, I uploaded an image (MichaelShermer1.jpg) and requested GFDL permissions from the copyright owner (who is also the subject of the image). I included the full email trail on the image page which might serve as an example for others. I used a rather informal approach, but made sure that the owner understood the full ramifications of the license. It helps a great deal if you are simply honest and straightforward, since the owners are, after all, doing us all a favor. In addition to securing permission for the image, it appears as though I introduced another person to the wonderful world of Wikipedia who did not know about it previously. — Loadmaster 18:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The letters are missing something

If you received one of the sample letters, would you know how to properly give the required permission? Probably not. The letters need to include instructions to the copyright holder on how to respond. Each of the sample letters should be modified to include something like:

One way to give your permission to use the image: <URLs> is to reply to this letter with the statement:

"I own the copyright to the image mentioned in your letter and located at <URLs>. I grant permission to copy, distribute and/or modify this image under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, no Back-Cover Texts, and subject to disclaimers found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer ." --Jreferee 20:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I added my sample form here. Please feel free to review it. -- Jreferee 18:17, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Free Images

Images can be divided between free and non-free ones. Recently, there has been a push to eliminate the non-free ones that, apparently, can be recreated. However, until now I have seen many places with suggestions about how to request free images, but not a project to coordinate efforts. Because of this I am giving the first push to WikiProject Free Images, aimed at centralizing discussion about free images. Currently, it is situated at my userspace, User:ReyBrujo/WikiProject Free Images, but with enough positive feedback and help, it will be moved into the Wikipedia namespace.

The WikiProject aim is broad: first and foremost, educate users about the benefits of free images, but also to teach the differences between free licenses when applied to images. Aside this, the WikiProject will focus in replacing the current fair use images with free ones of good quality, by contacting the media, agencies, publishers or other copyright holders as necessary. It would keep a list of requested images to different organizations, with the different steps that had been taken and the different replies. It will also have an index of all the images that had been donated by these organizations, so that they are able to review their contributions. Also, the members of the WikiProject would review the usage of these images in Wikipedia, verifying that attributions are applied at all times when requested by the copyright holder.

This WikiProject was given as a thought during the Wikipedia:Elimination of Fair Use Rationale in Promotional Photos discussion, and since apparently there has not been a similar one, I decided to try it out. With some luck and effort, it should be possible to replace many of the current fair use images with free ones of similar quality.

Please drop by and give some thoughts in there. Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 18:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Erroneous info in this page

Wikipedia:Example_requests_for_permission#What_not_to_ask_permission_for is blatantly erroneous. It makes it sound like solely GFDL images are usable in WP. In point of fact, there are multiple ways a person may release an image and it be used on WP. Here are just two examples besides the GFDL:

  • Creative Commons-Attribution
  • Copyright by [Name of Person]. The copyright holder allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that [Name of Person] is attributed as the author and derivatives do not deface the piece in any way.

CyberAnth 03:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sufficient permission for WP?

"These photos are free of charge with the mention ©Council of Europe" [1]

I don't think that'd be sufficient permission but just in case... is it? Yonatan (contribs/talk) 14:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

They are free of charge, but can they be modified? If not, it's not sufficient. Garion96 (talk) 14:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Permission query

If someone gives permission to use their photos from flickr but does not change the license, can we use the photosMuntuwandi 13:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Depends. If the person gives permission to use the photos on wikipedia, no. If the person by e-mail licenses the photos under a free license, yes. If the latter, you can forward that e-mail to the permissions OSTR. Garion96 (talk) 19:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I sent an email using one of the templates(casual). The user said I could use his photos but the OTRS said no because he has not changed the license.Muntuwandi 19:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

What did he said in this e-mail? Did he specifically stated "I release the images found on http:// etc on a creative commons cc-by license? Or something similar like that? Garion96 (talk) 19:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
he said "feel free to use the photos". I sent the email with all the details about wikipedia image policy.Muntuwandi 20:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
"Feel free to use them" is not clear enough. Please ask him to specifically state a license. He does not have to change the license on flickr. I did it often enough myself, where the license on flickr is unfree, but by e-mail I got the permission to use under a free license. Like this image. Garion96 (talk) 21:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that wikipedia policy is too complicated and too legal for many of the typical photographers. Many have given permission to use their photos but when I ask them to change a license or submit a statement, they are intimidated and disappear. Something needs to be done to simplify the process. Most people would be happy to have their images on wikipedia but have limited understanding of licensing and so when the see long phraises like "GNU Free Documentation License Version 1.2" they are freaked out. If wikipedia truly intends to be a "comprehensive knowledge base that is not only available at no charge," then something must be done to streamline the process of acquiring images. Apparently flickr has over 230 million photos[2], of these only about 5 million are suitable for use on wikipedia. Which means the pool from which one has to search from is extremely small and is highly skewed to pop culture or other more westernized concepts. I think wikipedia policy is doing a disservice to itself.Muntuwandi 15:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sqaring RfP w/ User privacy // Photos of living people

I'm confused about how requesting permission for use of an image squares w/ anonymous user names for editors. It's hard to see how one could send a request & document it here w/o sacrificing privacy as an editor. Conversely, it would seem easy for an editor to claim verbal or written snail-mail permission, or even falsify an email granting permission w/o ever getting caught unless the copyright holder sues. As such, the legal value of such "permission" seem pretty dubious to me.

More generally, I have trouble understanding Wikipedia's policy. Take bios of live or recently deceased people: For any even marginally notable person, any reader can view hundreds or even thousands of pictures of them free of charge just by typing their name into Google Images. Hardly any of these web pages contain any copyright info, or even attribution. But when I upload an image, taken from a page expressly marked "Digital Press Kit" at the site of the subject's PR firm, and claim Fair Use, I instantly get a template from an Admin stating that the image "illustrates a subject for which a free image might reasonably be found or created that adequately provides the same information." Where would such a "free image" be found of a living person for which Public Domain or other free license is at all demonstrable? --Turangalila (talk) 22:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/x/a/Wikipedia_talk%7EExample_requests_for_permission_53a1.html"