- Template:Personality rights (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (restore|cache|TfD)
The original nominator completely misunderstood the reasoning behind this template. Its purpose is to inform downloaders that they may not necessarily use this image in certain circumstances. The nomination states, "WP:BLP policy extends to all material involving living persons, including images, thus making the disclaimer redundant," but BLP is an internal policy that applies to articles written about living persons, not how people are to reuse the content. The nominator's second point is that personality rights vary across jurisdictions, but that's precisely why this is needed; the downloader is responsible for determining those rights. The third point is the only one that has any validity, that WP:NDA might open us up to lawsuits if the disclaimers are not applied consistently. howcheng {chat} 17:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse. Why are we responsible for how someone might reuse an image? Besides, doesn't this duplicate information found on our general disclaimer, which is linked to from every page? Finally, to address the TFD itself, the close was proper, there was no opposition. --Kbdank71 17:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- I have no complaints about the close; I'm just saying that the reasons for nomination (except the 3rd) were completely inapplicable to the template's intended usage. howcheng {chat} 18:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse - I see no problem with the nom or the closing of the TfD. -- Kesh (talk) 21:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Endorse - I do not think we should be responsible for, nor attempt to advise, the use of images by others. Thus, while I agree that my nomination statement is largely inapplicable to the downloading of images and their off-wiki use, I do not think we should have a template to address such use. Black Falcon (Talk) 21:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: Wikipedia:General disclaimer (and other disclaimers linked from there) says nothing anywhere about the re-use of images and how personality rights may apply to images of people. I will happily withdraw this request if it can be added there. Can I do it myself, or do I need Mike Godwin or another Foundation representative to do it? howcheng {chat} 22:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think you could do it yourself (see, for instance, this addition), though a talk page note might be in order... Black Falcon (Talk) 23:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Wikipedia does not encourage the violation of any laws; and cannot be responsible for any violations of such laws, should you link to this domain or use, reproduce, or republish the information contained herein. That pretty much says we're not liable if you break any law by reusing anything you got from us. No changes needed. --Kbdank71 00:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think that's too obscure, especially since the licensing of images is already so confusing. Think about it -- the image page says (to paraphrase) "you can use this for any purpose" but you can't really. It's really misleading. I think we have the responsibility of saying, "Hey, that's not always the case." It's not that much more text to add to the disclaimer, isn't it? howcheng {chat} 00:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- You might want to check with the foundation on that. I'm not a lawyer, but from an editor's perspective, it's fine. Besides, if we get sued, what is the charge going to be? "But Wikipedia said I could do whatever I wanted with the image!" Again, not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that would get tossed out before that sentence could be finished. --Kbdank71 10:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- Closing administrator statement. Simple close, I have no recollection of it though, that's really long ago. RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the Dishpan!) 23:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Overturn, obviously we're not responsible for people's use of images but there's nothing wrong with giving them a little warning anyway. -- Naerii 15:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
|
