Celebrity pictures

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
33 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Celebrity pictures

Garion96
Regarding Jimmy Wales's comment here
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3APublicity_photos&diff=66922063&oldid=58823881
concerning
fair use.

To quote "In general, ordinary publicity photos of celebrities should not be
used in Wikipedia unless they are released under a free license. We are
powerful enough now that we can insist on this, and get it, from just about
any celebrity, or we can get a free photo in a number of different ways.
Using fair use in such cases discourages us from creatively looking for a
way to enlarge the commons."

Would it be a good idea if the foundation would ask for 'free' images from
big record companies (like Sony music entertainment), actor agencies etc. I
know any editor can do this, but it would definitely have a greater
chance of success if it is coming from the foundation.

Garion96
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

James Hare
If I remember correctly, these models (who were twins) had a picture that
was deleted because the modeling agency was pissed at the copyrighted
photo's presence on Wikipedia. Later, the models took a picture of
themselves that they gave to Wikipedia.

Perhaps we could allow something similar to happen?

On 8/9/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Regarding Jimmy Wales's comment here
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3APublicity_photos&diff=66922063&oldid=58823881
> concerning
> fair use.
>
> To quote "In general, ordinary publicity photos of celebrities should not
> be
> used in Wikipedia unless they are released under a free license. We are
> powerful enough now that we can insist on this, and get it, from just
> about
> any celebrity, or we can get a free photo in a number of different ways.
> Using fair use in such cases discourages us from creatively looking for a
> way to enlarge the commons."
>
> Would it be a good idea if the foundation would ask for 'free' images from
> big record companies (like Sony music entertainment), actor agencies etc.
> I
> know any editor can do this, but it would definitely have a greater
> chance of success if it is coming from the foundation.
>
> Garion96
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Christopher Larberg
In reply to this post by Garion96
On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 23:43 +0200, Garion96 wrote:
> Would it be a good idea if the foundation would ask for 'free' images from
> big record companies (like Sony music entertainment), actor agencies etc. I
> know any editor can do this, but it would definitely have a greater
> chance of success if it is coming from the foundation.

Just to interject here, I think it's worth a shot (if someone at the
Foundation is willing to do it), but I'd be willing to bet that most of
those publicity photos are only offered under non-free licenses (limited
redistribution, no derivative works, etc.). I still think it wouldn't
hurt to at least try, though.
--
Christopher Larberg [[w:en:User:Slowking Man]]
<[hidden email]>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

signature.asc (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Mark Evans-3
In reply to this post by Garion96
I assume Garion96 & Larberg were speaking of the album covers Jimbo
mentioned in his post. If not, please let us know.
I'm no expert about copyright law, but I don't see how it would be possible
for a record company to give us such a 'free' image without compromising the
integrity of their copyright. All that they would be able to give us would
be an alternative image that they had no interest in protecting, which
wouldn't be useful to us. Maybe we could get free photos of bands from Sony,
but that amounts to the publicity photos mentioned earlier. I doubt that
Time Warner or UMG would give us a suitable substitute for the album
cover for Nirvana's Nevermind.

On Aug 9, 2006, at 6:45 PM, Christopher Larberg wrote:

On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 23:43 +0200, Garion96 wrote:
Would it be a good idea if the foundation would ask for 'free' images from
big record companies (like Sony music entertainment), actor agencies etc. I
know any editor can do this, but it would definitely have a greater
chance of success if it is coming from the foundation.

Just to interject here, I think it's worth a shot (if someone at the
Foundation is willing to do it), but I'd be willing to bet that most of
those publicity photos are only offered under non-free licenses (limited
redistribution, no derivative works, etc.). I still think it wouldn't
hurt to at least try, though.
--
Christopher Larberg [[w:en:User:Slowking Man]]
<[hidden email]>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Magnus Manske
In reply to this post by Christopher Larberg
Christopher Larberg schrieb:

> On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 23:43 +0200, Garion96 wrote:
>  
>> Would it be a good idea if the foundation would ask for 'free' images from
>> big record companies (like Sony music entertainment), actor agencies etc. I
>> know any editor can do this, but it would definitely have a greater
>> chance of success if it is coming from the foundation.
>>    
>
> Just to interject here, I think it's worth a shot (if someone at the
> Foundation is willing to do it), but I'd be willing to bet that most of
> those publicity photos are only offered under non-free licenses (limited
> redistribution, no derivative works, etc.). I still think it wouldn't
> hurt to at least try, though.
>  
While favorable, wikipedia does not really *need* high resolution photos
in this case; an image for a web site can be much smaller (200x300 pixel
would suffice) than an image needed for high-quality printing. Maybe
some companies would be willing to release such a low-res version under
GFDL or CC-BY-SA, as potential commercial use of these images is limited
due to their small size.

And yes, I'd prefer hi-res images too, but if the choice is "no free
image" or "small free image", I'd always go for the latter...

Magnus


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

signature.asc (257 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Garion96
In reply to this post by Mark Evans-3
On 8/10/06, Mark Evans <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I assume Garion96 & Larberg were speaking of the album covers Jimbo
> mentioned in his post. If not, please let us know.
> I'm no expert about copyright law, but I don't see how it would be
> possible
> for a record company to give us such a 'free' image without compromising
> the
> integrity of their copyright. All that they would be able to give us would
> be an alternative image that they had no interest in protecting, which
> wouldn't be useful to us. Maybe we could get free photos of bands from
> Sony,
> but that amounts to the publicity photos mentioned earlier. I doubt that
> Time Warner or UMG would give us a suitable substitute for the album
> cover for Nirvana's Nevermind.


No, I was definitely not talking about album covers. No record company would
release those under a 'free' license. I was talking about publicity
pictures.

Garion96
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Garion96
In reply to this post by Magnus Manske
On 8/10/06, Magnus Manske <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> While favorable, wikipedia does not really *need* high resolution photos
> in this case; an image for a web site can be much smaller (200x300 pixel
> would suffice) than an image needed for high-quality printing. Maybe
> some companies would be willing to release such a low-res version under
> GFDL or CC-BY-SA, as potential commercial use of these images is limited
> due to their small size.
>
> And yes, I'd prefer hi-res images too, but if the choice is "no free
> image" or "small free image", I'd always go for the latter...


I didn't even think of that. Yes, the chance of companies willing to release
low-res versions would definitely be bigger.

Garion96
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Garion96
In reply to this post by Garion96
On 8/9/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>  Regarding Jimmy Wales's comment here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3APublicity_photos&diff=66922063&oldid=58823881
>  concerning fair use.
>
> To quote "In general, ordinary publicity photos of celebrities should not
> be used in Wikipedia unless they are released under a free license. We are
> powerful enough now that we can insist on this, and get it, from just about
> any celebrity, or we can get a free photo in a number of different ways.
> Using fair use in such cases discourages us from creatively looking for a
> way to enlarge the commons."
>
> Would it be a good idea if the foundation would ask for 'free' images from
> big record companies (like Sony music entertainment), actor agencies etc. I
> know any editor can do this, but it would definitely have a greater
> chance of success if it is coming from the foundation.
>
> Garion96
>

Anymore comments on this? Ixnays, supports and the like? :)

Garion
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

James Hare
Generally speaking, I am a weak defender of the use of copyrighted pictures
of living people (except when there's a freebie available) because I don't
think they have the time to have a picture of themselves taken so it can be
used on Wikipedia. (Don't hit me back with semantics -- I know it would be
usable for more than Wikipedia.)

However, I do believe we should be persuing an active effort to obtain
free-use photographs of living people wherever possible. I'm talking about
an effort at the Foundation level.

On 8/25/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 8/9/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >  Regarding Jimmy Wales's comment here
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3APublicity_photos&diff=66922063&oldid=58823881
> >  concerning fair use.
> >
> > To quote "In general, ordinary publicity photos of celebrities should
> not
> > be used in Wikipedia unless they are released under a free license. We
> are
> > powerful enough now that we can insist on this, and get it, from just
> about
> > any celebrity, or we can get a free photo in a number of different ways.
> > Using fair use in such cases discourages us from creatively looking for
> a
> > way to enlarge the commons."
> >
> > Would it be a good idea if the foundation would ask for 'free' images
> from
> > big record companies (like Sony music entertainment), actor agencies
> etc. I
> > know any editor can do this, but it would definitely have a greater
> > chance of success if it is coming from the foundation.
> >
> > Garion96
> >
>
> Anymore comments on this? Ixnays, supports and the like? :)
>
> Garion
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Birgitte_sb
I suggest you work on getting these photos as
individual editors.  After all "The Foundation"
consists of around a dozen people and there are many
thousands of individual editors.  I imagine at least
three dozens of those editors are particulary
interested in these pictures.  While at the same time
the people that make up "The Foundation" propably feel
as if they each have three dozen priority tasks to do
already.  Anr I do not believe this project would be a
priority by Foundation standards.  So practically
speaking  you are *not* more likely to succeed in
obtaining photos if it is left up to "The Foundation".

Birgitte SB

--- James Hare <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Generally speaking, I am a weak defender of the use
> of copyrighted pictures
> of living people (except when there's a freebie
> available) because I don't
> think they have the time to have a picture of
> themselves taken so it can be
> used on Wikipedia. (Don't hit me back with semantics
> -- I know it would be
> usable for more than Wikipedia.)
>
> However, I do believe we should be persuing an
> active effort to obtain
> free-use photographs of living people wherever
> possible. I'm talking about
> an effort at the Foundation level.
>
> On 8/25/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/9/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > >  Regarding Jimmy Wales's comment here
> >
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3APublicity_photos&diff=66922063&oldid=58823881

> > >  concerning fair use.
> > >
> > > To quote "In general, ordinary publicity photos
> of celebrities should
> > not
> > > be used in Wikipedia unless they are released
> under a free license. We
> > are
> > > powerful enough now that we can insist on this,
> and get it, from just
> > about
> > > any celebrity, or we can get a free photo in a
> number of different ways.
> > > Using fair use in such cases discourages us from
> creatively looking for
> > a
> > > way to enlarge the commons."
> > >
> > > Would it be a good idea if the foundation would
> ask for 'free' images
> > from
> > > big record companies (like Sony music
> entertainment), actor agencies
> > etc. I
> > > know any editor can do this, but it would
> definitely have a greater
> > > chance of success if it is coming from the
> foundation.
> > >
> > > Garion96
> > >
> >
> > Anymore comments on this? Ixnays, supports and the
> like? :)
> >
> > Garion
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> >
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

James Hare
Alright, then I'll be sending out the letters on behalf of myself.

On 8/25/06, Birgitte SB <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I suggest you work on getting these photos as
> individual editors.  After all "The Foundation"
> consists of around a dozen people and there are many
> thousands of individual editors.  I imagine at least
> three dozens of those editors are particulary
> interested in these pictures.  While at the same time
> the people that make up "The Foundation" propably feel
> as if they each have three dozen priority tasks to do
> already.  Anr I do not believe this project would be a
> priority by Foundation standards.  So practically
> speaking  you are *not* more likely to succeed in
> obtaining photos if it is left up to "The Foundation".
>
> Birgitte SB
>
> --- James Hare <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Generally speaking, I am a weak defender of the use
> > of copyrighted pictures
> > of living people (except when there's a freebie
> > available) because I don't
> > think they have the time to have a picture of
> > themselves taken so it can be
> > used on Wikipedia. (Don't hit me back with semantics
> > -- I know it would be
> > usable for more than Wikipedia.)
> >
> > However, I do believe we should be persuing an
> > active effort to obtain
> > free-use photographs of living people wherever
> > possible. I'm talking about
> > an effort at the Foundation level.
> >
> > On 8/25/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 8/9/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >  Regarding Jimmy Wales's comment here
> > >
> >
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3APublicity_photos&diff=66922063&oldid=58823881
> > > >  concerning fair use.
> > > >
> > > > To quote "In general, ordinary publicity photos
> > of celebrities should
> > > not
> > > > be used in Wikipedia unless they are released
> > under a free license. We
> > > are
> > > > powerful enough now that we can insist on this,
> > and get it, from just
> > > about
> > > > any celebrity, or we can get a free photo in a
> > number of different ways.
> > > > Using fair use in such cases discourages us from
> > creatively looking for
> > > a
> > > > way to enlarge the commons."
> > > >
> > > > Would it be a good idea if the foundation would
> > ask for 'free' images
> > > from
> > > > big record companies (like Sony music
> > entertainment), actor agencies
> > > etc. I
> > > > know any editor can do this, but it would
> > definitely have a greater
> > > > chance of success if it is coming from the
> > foundation.
> > > >
> > > > Garion96
> > > >
> > >
> > > Anymore comments on this? Ixnays, supports and the
> > like? :)
> > >
> > > Garion
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > >
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Effe iets anders
In reply to this post by Birgitte_sb
That is not fully true. I have tried myself in the past to get photo's
sourcetexts and other material to extract from organizations. It works
very difficult because they don't like to deal with individuals. And
they don't get at all how the wikimedia-projects work. They feel an
urgent need to speak with a formal organization, even if that does not
matter at the end. If you want to get photo's on a large scale, you
need to be able to say: "Hi, I'm xxx from the yyy-organization, and I
am here to talk with you". It should not be a problem to mention as
well that you are not allowed to make any agreements on behalf of that
organization.

Such an organization does not have to be per se the Wikimedia
Foundation Inc., but can also be a local chapter. As long as you can
tell them *somehow* that you are associated with such an organization.
You need that to enter the conversation. If they are going to release
images in the free domains, you don't ahve to make up contracts, sign
stuff or someting like that, so it should not be a big deal.

Of course the foundation-people have already a lot of work to do. But
it should be possible to get more people in semi-formal positions,
right? theoretically we could make up an officer for obtaining open
content and material for the projects. The officer does not have to
have any "power", abilities or something like that, just the name does
already do a really good job. Maybe something to think about?

Greetings, Lodewijk

2006/8/26, Birgitte SB <[hidden email]>:

> I suggest you work on getting these photos as
> individual editors.  After all "The Foundation"
> consists of around a dozen people and there are many
> thousands of individual editors.  I imagine at least
> three dozens of those editors are particulary
> interested in these pictures.  While at the same time
> the people that make up "The Foundation" propably feel
> as if they each have three dozen priority tasks to do
> already.  Anr I do not believe this project would be a
> priority by Foundation standards.  So practically
> speaking  you are *not* more likely to succeed in
> obtaining photos if it is left up to "The Foundation".
>
> Birgitte SB
>
> --- James Hare <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Generally speaking, I am a weak defender of the use
> > of copyrighted pictures
> > of living people (except when there's a freebie
> > available) because I don't
> > think they have the time to have a picture of
> > themselves taken so it can be
> > used on Wikipedia. (Don't hit me back with semantics
> > -- I know it would be
> > usable for more than Wikipedia.)
> >
> > However, I do believe we should be persuing an
> > active effort to obtain
> > free-use photographs of living people wherever
> > possible. I'm talking about
> > an effort at the Foundation level.
> >
> > On 8/25/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 8/9/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >  Regarding Jimmy Wales's comment here
> > >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3APublicity_photos&diff=66922063&oldid=58823881
> > > >  concerning fair use.
> > > >
> > > > To quote "In general, ordinary publicity photos
> > of celebrities should
> > > not
> > > > be used in Wikipedia unless they are released
> > under a free license. We
> > > are
> > > > powerful enough now that we can insist on this,
> > and get it, from just
> > > about
> > > > any celebrity, or we can get a free photo in a
> > number of different ways.
> > > > Using fair use in such cases discourages us from
> > creatively looking for
> > > a
> > > > way to enlarge the commons."
> > > >
> > > > Would it be a good idea if the foundation would
> > ask for 'free' images
> > > from
> > > > big record companies (like Sony music
> > entertainment), actor agencies
> > > etc. I
> > > > know any editor can do this, but it would
> > definitely have a greater
> > > > chance of success if it is coming from the
> > foundation.
> > > >
> > > > Garion96
> > > >
> > >
> > > Anymore comments on this? Ixnays, supports and the
> > like? :)
> > >
> > > Garion
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > >
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Birgitte_sb
I agree this is an instance where chapters are very
useful.  I didn't mean to imply that nothing should be
sent on to the Foundation.  But if the individual
editors take care of the easy ones.  And also gather a
list of the exact contact info of people who requested
to deal with someone official.  Well providing that
list to one the commitees or something is a different
proposition than asking the Foundation to gather free
photos of celebrities for Wikipedia in general terms.

Birgitte SB

--- effe iets anders <[hidden email]> wrote:

> That is not fully true. I have tried myself in the
> past to get photo's
> sourcetexts and other material to extract from
> organizations. It works
> very difficult because they don't like to deal with
> individuals. And
> they don't get at all how the wikimedia-projects
> work. They feel an
> urgent need to speak with a formal organization,
> even if that does not
> matter at the end. If you want to get photo's on a
> large scale, you
> need to be able to say: "Hi, I'm xxx from the
> yyy-organization, and I
> am here to talk with you". It should not be a
> problem to mention as
> well that you are not allowed to make any agreements
> on behalf of that
> organization.
>
> Such an organization does not have to be per se the
> Wikimedia
> Foundation Inc., but can also be a local chapter. As
> long as you can
> tell them *somehow* that you are associated with
> such an organization.
> You need that to enter the conversation. If they are
> going to release
> images in the free domains, you don't ahve to make
> up contracts, sign
> stuff or someting like that, so it should not be a
> big deal.
>
> Of course the foundation-people have already a lot
> of work to do. But
> it should be possible to get more people in
> semi-formal positions,
> right? theoretically we could make up an officer for
> obtaining open
> content and material for the projects. The officer
> does not have to
> have any "power", abilities or something like that,
> just the name does
> already do a really good job. Maybe something to
> think about?
>
> Greetings, Lodewijk
>
> 2006/8/26, Birgitte SB <[hidden email]>:
> > I suggest you work on getting these photos as
> > individual editors.  After all "The Foundation"
> > consists of around a dozen people and there are
> many
> > thousands of individual editors.  I imagine at
> least
> > three dozens of those editors are particulary
> > interested in these pictures.  While at the same
> time
> > the people that make up "The Foundation" propably
> feel
> > as if they each have three dozen priority tasks to
> do
> > already.  Anr I do not believe this project would
> be a
> > priority by Foundation standards.  So practically
> > speaking  you are *not* more likely to succeed in
> > obtaining photos if it is left up to "The
> Foundation".
> >
> > Birgitte SB
> >
> > --- James Hare <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Generally speaking, I am a weak defender of the
> use
> > > of copyrighted pictures
> > > of living people (except when there's a freebie
> > > available) because I don't
> > > think they have the time to have a picture of
> > > themselves taken so it can be
> > > used on Wikipedia. (Don't hit me back with
> semantics
> > > -- I know it would be
> > > usable for more than Wikipedia.)
> > >
> > > However, I do believe we should be persuing an
> > > active effort to obtain
> > > free-use photographs of living people wherever
> > > possible. I'm talking about
> > > an effort at the Foundation level.
> > >
> > > On 8/25/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 8/9/06, Garion96 <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >  Regarding Jimmy Wales's comment here
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3APublicity_photos&diff=66922063&oldid=58823881

> > > > >  concerning fair use.
> > > > >
> > > > > To quote "In general, ordinary publicity
> photos
> > > of celebrities should
> > > > not
> > > > > be used in Wikipedia unless they are
> released
> > > under a free license. We
> > > > are
> > > > > powerful enough now that we can insist on
> this,
> > > and get it, from just
> > > > about
> > > > > any celebrity, or we can get a free photo in
> a
> > > number of different ways.
> > > > > Using fair use in such cases discourages us
> from
> > > creatively looking for
> > > > a
> > > > > way to enlarge the commons."
> > > > >
> > > > > Would it be a good idea if the foundation
> would
> > > ask for 'free' images
> > > > from
> > > > > big record companies (like Sony music
> > > entertainment), actor agencies
> > > > etc. I
> > > > > know any editor can do this, but it would
> > > definitely have a greater
> > > > > chance of success if it is coming from the
> > > foundation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Garion96
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Anymore comments on this? Ixnays, supports and
> the
> > > like? :)
> > > >
> > > > Garion
> > > >
> _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > >
> >
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> >
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Garion96
On 8/26/06, Birgitte SB <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I agree this is an instance where chapters are very
> useful.  I didn't mean to imply that nothing should be
> sent on to the Foundation.  But if the individual
> editors take care of the easy ones.  And also gather a
> list of the exact contact info of people who requested
> to deal with someone official.  Well providing that
> list to one the commitees or something is a different
> proposition than asking the Foundation to gather free
> photos of celebrities for Wikipedia in general terms.
>
> Birgitte SB


Whether a chapter, the foundation or an officer for obtaining open content
material (I do like that idea) writes it doesn't matter yes. As long as it
looks official to the persons/companies receiving. But I also wouldn't mind
if the foundation itself did it, considering the (possibly legal) mess of
fair use images on en.wikipedia. Which is where this whole idea originated.

Garion96
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Gerard Meijssen-3
Garion96 wrote:

> On 8/26/06, Birgitte SB <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> I agree this is an instance where chapters are very
>> useful.  I didn't mean to imply that nothing should be
>> sent on to the Foundation.  But if the individual
>> editors take care of the easy ones.  And also gather a
>> list of the exact contact info of people who requested
>> to deal with someone official.  Well providing that
>> list to one the commitees or something is a different
>> proposition than asking the Foundation to gather free
>> photos of celebrities for Wikipedia in general terms.
>>
>> Birgitte SB
>>    
>
>
> Whether a chapter, the foundation or an officer for obtaining open content
> material (I do like that idea) writes it doesn't matter yes. As long as it
> looks official to the persons/companies receiving. But I also wouldn't mind
> if the foundation itself did it, considering the (possibly legal) mess of
> fair use images on en.wikipedia. Which is where this whole idea originated.
>
> Garion96
Hoi,
The WMF does have a lot of work and too few people to do things. When
the Foundation is to these things as well, when do they have time to do
their Foundation work?
Thanks,
     GerardM

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Garion96
On 8/27/06, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Garion96 wrote:
> > On 8/26/06, Birgitte SB <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> I agree this is an instance where chapters are very
> >> useful.  I didn't mean to imply that nothing should be
> >> sent on to the Foundation.  But if the individual
> >> editors take care of the easy ones.  And also gather a
> >> list of the exact contact info of people who requested
> >> to deal with someone official.  Well providing that
> >> list to one the commitees or something is a different
> >> proposition than asking the Foundation to gather free
> >> photos of celebrities for Wikipedia in general terms.
> >>
> >> Birgitte SB
> >>
> >
> >
> > Whether a chapter, the foundation or an officer for obtaining open
> content
> > material (I do like that idea) writes it doesn't matter yes. As long as
> it
> > looks official to the persons/companies receiving. But I also wouldn't
> mind
> > if the foundation itself did it, considering the (possibly legal) mess
> of
> > fair use images on en.wikipedia. Which is where this whole idea
> originated.
> >
> > Garion96
> Hoi,
> The WMF does have a lot of work and too few people to do things. When
> the Foundation is to these things as well, when do they have time to do
> their Foundation work?
> Thanks,
>     GerardM


Yes, I do realise the foundation is small (in people) and does a lot of
work. I do read this mailing list. :) Plus the idea was not that the
foundation would always do those things. Just a one time standard letter and
send copies to all those big companies. And hey, it's just an idea.


Garion96
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Effe iets anders
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
Hey Gerard,

That's why I suggested to appoint an officer to do this stuff. Someone
who likes this, and who is able to put the time in it. That shouldn't
have to cost lots of foundation-time, except of the appointment an
reporting and maybe some handshaking if you meet them.

Lodewijk

2006/8/27, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]>:

> Garion96 wrote:
> > On 8/26/06, Birgitte SB <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> I agree this is an instance where chapters are very
> >> useful.  I didn't mean to imply that nothing should be
> >> sent on to the Foundation.  But if the individual
> >> editors take care of the easy ones.  And also gather a
> >> list of the exact contact info of people who requested
> >> to deal with someone official.  Well providing that
> >> list to one the commitees or something is a different
> >> proposition than asking the Foundation to gather free
> >> photos of celebrities for Wikipedia in general terms.
> >>
> >> Birgitte SB
> >>
> >
> >
> > Whether a chapter, the foundation or an officer for obtaining open content
> > material (I do like that idea) writes it doesn't matter yes. As long as it
> > looks official to the persons/companies receiving. But I also wouldn't mind
> > if the foundation itself did it, considering the (possibly legal) mess of
> > fair use images on en.wikipedia. Which is where this whole idea originated.
> >
> > Garion96
> Hoi,
> The WMF does have a lot of work and too few people to do things. When
> the Foundation is to these things as well, when do they have time to do
> their Foundation work?
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Anthony DiPierro
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
On 8/26/06, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hoi,
> The WMF does have a lot of work and too few people to do things. When
> the Foundation is to these things as well, when do they have time to do
> their Foundation work?
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
Maybe the foundation should expand.  There are certainly some people
who want to be members, who haven't yet been given the opportunity,
despite the fact that the bylaws say they should.

Wikimedia is "powerful enough now that we can insist on [free images],
and get it, from just about any celebrity".  Joe Schmoe Wikipedian is
not, and if a dozen people contact someone claiming to be acting on
behalf of the foundation, even that power is quickly going to
dissipate.

At the very least a press release should be made asking for free
images of celebrities.  Or maybe a "Personal Appeal from Wikipedia
Founder Jimmy Wales", for images, not for money.  Maybe an official
address where companies can "send their pictures", along with a
standardized release form putting them under CC-BY-SA.  Then at least
anyone who wants to go rogue and start asking for images on their own
has something to point to.  But what makes sense in addition is to
have a coordinated effort to get the word out, so as to avoid
duplication.

I'm not at all good at writing press releases, so I won't volunteer
for that.  But if no one else wants to do it I'd be willing to
maintain a page on meta where we can gather contact information and
hand out assignments to contact the appropriate people.  It's not that
it's a hard job, it's just that the Foundation hasn't contacted
someone and asked them to do it.

As a final note, consider this.  Wikimedia is very protective of its
trademark.  For good reason it doesn't want random people speaking on
behalf of itself.  The *only* way to leverage the name of Wikimedia is
to get official permission to do so.  Aside from that, just randomly
contacting huge corporations and asking for free pictures pretty
please, it just aint gonna work.

Anthony
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Birgitte_sb
In reply to this post by Garion96


--- Garion96 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8/27/06, Gerard Meijssen
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Garion96 wrote:
> > > On 8/26/06, Birgitte SB <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree this is an instance where chapters are
> very
> > >> useful.  I didn't mean to imply that nothing
> should be
> > >> sent on to the Foundation.  But if the
> individual
> > >> editors take care of the easy ones.  And also
> gather a
> > >> list of the exact contact info of people who
> requested
> > >> to deal with someone official.  Well providing
> that
> > >> list to one the commitees or something is a
> different
> > >> proposition than asking the Foundation to
> gather free
> > >> photos of celebrities for Wikipedia in general
> terms.
> > >>
> > >> Birgitte SB
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Whether a chapter, the foundation or an officer
> for obtaining open
> > content
> > > material (I do like that idea) writes it doesn't
> matter yes. As long as
> > it
> > > looks official to the persons/companies
> receiving. But I also wouldn't
> > mind
> > > if the foundation itself did it, considering the
> (possibly legal) mess
> > of
> > > fair use images on en.wikipedia. Which is where
> this whole idea
> > originated.
> > >
> > > Garion96
> > Hoi,
> > The WMF does have a lot of work and too few people
> to do things. When
> > the Foundation is to these things as well, when do
> they have time to do
> > their Foundation work?
> > Thanks,
> >     GerardM
>
>
> Yes, I do realise the foundation is small (in
> people) and does a lot of
> work. I do read this mailing list. :) Plus the idea
> was not that the
> foundation would always do those things. Just a one
> time standard letter and
> send copies to all those big companies. And hey,
> it's just an idea.
>
>
> Garion96
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

Since you really want this to happen here is my
suggestion.  Draft a letter that you think appealing.
Put together a spreadsheet of with all the address and
appropriate personalizations for the mailing wizard
substitution thing.  Submit this together with your
proposal to both the communications committee and the
special project committees.  Maybe one of them will be
able to approve your letter and send it out all
official-like.  I don't really know if they would but
that has a better chance than anything else I can
think of.

I don't think my earlier message was clear on one
point.  I was not trying to make a judgment on whether
the Foundation should be doing this sort of thing.  I
meant get across that although the celebrities might
be more likely to release a photo to someone with an
official position within the Foundation.  The
likelihood of someone from the foundation actually
taking the task on, especially the all the legwork, is
very low.  From what I understand there is generally a
struggle to complete tasks that really do require
officialness.  Your original post seemed to be trying
to find the best way to obtain these photos in a short
time.  I don't think going through the Foundation will
lead to good results here, and it definately will not
be quick.  

Now this is just my take from reading this list every
day.  These sorts of things, regardless if they are
good ideas, are the kind of requests that just never
get done, in fact they normally don't even get
responded to.  I do not actually do any Foundation
work myself, I should probably not even be answering
you as it might be misleading.  The reason I did was
because I didn't expect anyone else to, and I thought
you had the wrong idea about what the Foundation
really was.  Most people in the projects have the
wrong idea about the Foundation, including me some
months back.  


Birgitte SB

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Celebrity pictures

Garion96
On 8/27/06, Birgitte SB <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Since you really want this to happen here is my
> suggestion.  Draft a letter that you think appealing.
> Put together a spreadsheet of with all the address and
> appropriate personalizations for the mailing wizard
> substitution thing.  Submit this together with your
> proposal to both the communications committee and the
> special project committees.  Maybe one of them will be
> able to approve your letter and send it out all
> official-like.  I don't really know if they would but
> that has a better chance than anything else I can
> think of.


Thanks for your reply. I only want this to happen of course if there is a
chance for success. :)
I like Anthony's suggestion of putting up a page on meta for this. Since
english is not my native language it's probably better if someone else
writes it. If writing is the best way anyway. Perhaps that press
release/personal appeal Anthony mentioned where individual editors who
request images can link to would be much better.

Your original post seemed to be trying
> to find the best way to obtain these photos in a short
> time.  I don't think going through the Foundation will
> lead to good results here, and it definately will not
> be quick.


I think, but I might be wrong, that something coming from the foundation
would lead to better results.

To quote from anthony's mail. "Wikimedia is "powerful enough now that we can
insist on [free images], and get it, from just about any celebrity".  Joe
Schmoe Wikipedian is not, and if a dozen people contact someone claiming to
be acting on behalf of the foundation, even that power is quickly going to
dissipate."

Whether it will be quick, I do not think or expect that to be the case.

I just now and then get discouraged when I see the fair use images mess on
en.wikipedia. I do like it that we can use fair use though but it seem to
be used too easily. If some good responses come from this, it would diminish
a bit the excessive fair use there.

Garion96
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
12