The National Portrait Gallery Threatens Litigation, Big Oops for WMF? Options

[John Limey]

See the letter issued by solicitors for the UK National Portrait Gallery. Looks like the WMF and User:Dcoetzee might be headed for some serious trouble.

Naturally some idiot of an admin came along to block the account used to send the email immediately per WP:NLT. Yea...

[tarantino]

Lar has removed Dcoetzee's administrator rights, four minutes after a request by Gmaxwell, so he won't be tempted to unilaterally delete the images.

Discussion is here.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...etzee_adminship

[Lar]

Lar has removed Dcoetzee's administrator rights, four minutes after a request by Gmaxwell, so he won't be tempted to unilaterally delete the images.

Discussion is here.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...etzee_adminship

As a note, that wasn't my reason, but if you would like to think it was, go ahead.

Let's cut the bullshit here: the WMF is afraid that the "admin" bit Dcoetzee has can be used to argue the WMF has liability. Employee status, that kind of thing.

That wasn't why either, but if you would like to think it was, go ahead.

I think Lar's actions make WMF's liability worse, if you follow your logic to its conclusion. Lar is effectively taking responsibility for ensuring that Dcoetzee cannot rectify his alleged theft, and ensuring that the responsibility becomes the whole of Wikipedia's not Dcoetzee. Also, it gives lie to the "can't break it so do what you will" philosophy of Wikipedia. So what if the images are deleted - surely they can be restored? So why is there any need to withdraw rights. Withdraw the bit for bringing WMF into disrepute as a repository of stolen goods, but don't take the bit away for something that reputedly can be fixed.

Admin deletion makes something not publicly visible. Except to other admins.
Oversight makes something not visible, even to admins. Except to other oversighters.

The only way to truly delete something from WMF servers is to actually truly delete it, that is, go and find the files and nuke them, and find the database links from the File:blabla.jpg to the file itself, and nuke those, which requires developer access. Everything else is just setting visibility flags on various pieces of data that remain in the DB.

GMaxwell's request pointed out that Dc was being put in a potential conflict of interest, he might feel pressured to do something that, in actuality, would not resolve NPG's claim, in that it does not actually satisfy their request for deletion. Removing that conflict of interest lessens the pressure on Dc... if you then analyse the situation to infer that it thus increases the pressure on WMF... no comment, except suffice it to say that I don't like volunteers being left out to dry.

I think I have a reputation for doing fairly sensible things, most of the time. I think this was a sensible thing to do or I wouldn't have done it. I could be wrong.

The action is reversible by any steward or any Commons 'crat.

I doubt that avoiding WMF liability was your motive, but you do seem to be leaving the sphere or reasonable and moderate folk and joining the ranks of free culture nutters.

Gosh I hope not.

Speaking purely as myself and without any particular standing to make anything come out any particular way... the NPG expended time and effort and money to make these high quality images. It wasn't zero cost to them to make them or to host them. By analogy, the GPL makes provisions for paying "copying costs", and most people agree that's reasonable... the information is free, but you pay something to help defray costs of bringing it to you.

We had a discussion a while back regarding the Edo images, in which a different museum asked politely that Commons not host their very high quality images, because doing so cut into their revenue stream. In exchange, they offered to give Commons some medium quality images instead... way good enough for illustrative purposes. I was among those arguing FOR the deletion of those images (as was SB Johnny). I think that's the right thing to do. Even if the subject art is public domain, work nicely with the organization that has the images to find a good compromise.

Because while the art itself might be PD, it is fair to ask for compensation of some sort for the resource expended to do something to preserve and present the art. At least in my view. If I were a UK taxpayer I would be happy that the NPG was sheperding taxpayer dollars wisely by trying to raise some revenue to defray their expenses.

My hope is that the NPG offers up medium resolution images, that they are accepted as replacements, and that all the images carry a big banner on their description page saying "if you want really nifty hires versions of these, go (here, a link on the NPG site) and donate to get acces, or buy some awesome prints" or something like that...

(I would also hope the NPG drops its no photography rule)

[GlassBeadGame]

Lar has removed Dcoetzee's administrator rights, four minutes after a request by Gmaxwell, so he won't be tempted to unilaterally delete the images.

Discussion is here.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?t...etzee_adminship

As a note, that wasn't my reason, but if you would like to think it was, go ahead.

Let's cut the bullshit here: the WMF is afraid that the "admin" bit Dcoetzee has can be used to argue the WMF has liability. Employee status, that kind of thing.

That wasn't why either.

I doubt that avoiding WMF liability was your motive, but you do seem to be leaving the sphere or reasonable and moderate folk and joining the ranks of free culture nutters.

[One]

That wasn't why either.

I doubt that avoiding WMF liability was your motive, but you do seem to be leaving the sphere or reasonable and moderate folk and joining the ranks of free culture nutters.

Hmm? He hopes they get medium res version to delete the hires. A free culture nutter would keep the hires pics and "subversively" upload them across the internet.

[Lar]

That wasn't why either.

I doubt that avoiding WMF liability was your motive, but you do seem to be leaving the sphere or reasonable and moderate folk and joining the ranks of free culture nutters.

Hmm? He hopes they get medium res version to delete the hires. A free culture nutter would keep the hires pics and "subversively" upload them across the internet.

Note that my comment saying what my hope is... was edited in after GBG made the post following mine (else how could I have responded to his post in a post above his). No harm no foul.

[GlassBeadGame]

That wasn't why either.

I doubt that avoiding WMF liability was your motive, but you do seem to be leaving the sphere or reasonable and moderate folk and joining the ranks of free culture nutters.

Hmm? He hopes they get medium res version to delete the hires. A free culture nutter would keep the hires pics and "subversively" upload them across the internet.

Note that my comment saying what my hope is... was edited in after GBG made the post following mine (else how could I have responded to his post in a post above his). No harm no foul.

Yes I think I did something wrong with the post but I'm not sure what. Is it now restored?

[Lar]

Yes I think I did something wrong with the post but I'm not sure what. Is it now restored?

I do not think you did anything wrong. Maybe I did (stylistically), in that I was doing an omnibus reply (citing multiple people and replying to them) and I tucked your reply to it back into the post itself to keep all the stuff together... messes with causality but it looks neater.

Sorry for any confusion that may have caused.

I wasn't concerned with his "hope." I was speaking of his action in de-admin-ing "Dcoetzee" which can only serve to harden positions on all sides. At this point NPG's counsel have a response that consists of WMF declining discussion or even response, the intruder of their website turning not to prudent council but to "the community" for advice, that community labeling their attempts at asserting a copyright "copyfraud," and now another interloper (our very own Lar) taking action that would make even a token gesture of conciliation impossible.

I don't think that's true. They said they are going after Dc because WMF isn't responding. I'd rather WMF responds appropriately and that a compromise be worked out as I outlined. Dc deleting the images does nothing to satisfy their request that the images be removed completely, Commons has almost 300 admins who still could see them... but there still might be pressure applied to Dc anyway. Now, not so much.

Well, Lar, you are simply wrong, and you must know this.

...

Lar, you are a smart guy.

Smart but wrong, eh? Ok, got it, thanks for clearing that up.

[taiwopanfob]

Smart but wrong, eh? Ok, got it, thanks for clearing that up.

Well, if you can't tell the difference between ignorant and stupid, then maybe you are in fact stupid. Go ahead, try talking a bit more: evidence is always useful.


This post has been edited by taiwopanfob: