W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > January 2004

[w3photo] privacy, copyright and images

From: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:16:05 +0000 (GMT)
To: semantic-photolist@unitboy.com
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0401131719340.21128@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>


hi all,

re: libby: action libby summarise today's discussion re privacy and
copyright to the list
(http://rdfig.xmlhack.com/2004/01/13/2004-01-13.html#1073998330.179271)

I've tried to summarise the section of the meeting today, and make
reasonable suggestions given these discussions. I have my own opinions
on this, so feel free to disagree.

Two issues need more discussion:
- link to or download the photos? (might sidestep some potential legal
issues)
- creative commons sampling license:
http://creativecommons.org/license/sampling - which looks highly
relevant but would be an additional license.

------------------------

Discussion starts here:
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2004-01-13.html#T16-22-07

Summary: this area may be a minefield

Suggestions:
1. one license for the core set of photos held on server
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/1.0/

2. remove any photos from the core collection that people don't wish to
be there, without quibble, as long as either they created the photo or
are depicted in it

3. undertake to correct any errors in the metadata from the core
collection, and remove identification of people in the metadata if
requested by them

4. reserve the right to remove photos and metadata from the core
collection for any reason (but in practice don't do this unless there's
a really good reason)

Explanations follow.

------------------------
1. one license for core set of photos held on server

* avoids confusion
* sidesteps issues with commercial work;
* to encourage people to add photos.

* We should avoid the possible implication that we are getting people
to create metadata for our profit.

* Metadata should allow people to contact the owners of photos for
commercial

* Metadata should also be licensed.

[[
<GregElin> Okay...non-commercial it is, from the perspective of the
"core" collection.
]]
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2004-01-13.html#T16-25-05

[[
<Jhendler> Greg - I can't take a random picture of you and sell it
without your permission (legally) - so I'm thinking of two things -- one
is privacy rights, the other is commercial development
]]
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2004-01-13.html#T16-35-21

proposed licence:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/1.0/


------------------------
2. remove any photos from the core collection that people don't wish to
be there, without quibble, as long as either they created the photo or
are depicted in it

[[
<teefal> three angles here? 1) what's legal, 2) what's friendly, 3) what
will encourage people to post photos
]]
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2004-01-13.html#T16-36-43

* Legal http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/34231.html
* friendly
* the logistics of premptively getting their permission are probably too
difficult


------------------------
3. undertake to correct any errors in the metadata from the core
collection, and remove identification of people in the metadata if
requested by them

* avoid error propagation
* see 'friendly' above
* the logistics of premptively getting their permission are probably too
difficult

[[
<GregElin> We could also distinguish between (a) being in a photo and
(b) being identified in a photo.
<GregElin> Only identify people who say it is okay to be identified.
]]
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2004-01-13.html#T16-26-29

------------------------
4. reserve the right to remove photos and metadata from the core
collection for any reason (but in practice don't do this unless there's
a really good reason).

[[
<GregElin> Are we suggesting, in the first case, that we look at
submitted photos to remove unflattering? That could be okay. We are
pursuing an editorial objective: visual history of the W3 conferences.

<mc_> if this is large scale automated, who's adjudicating?
]]
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2004-01-13.html#T16-38-28


[[
GregElin> Ben recommended we start small...and we do some editing on the
photos. We don't just take everything. It could get out of hand, people
could be wading through lots of too dark photos...
]]
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2004-01-13.html#T16-43-45

[[
<mc_> it takes so much time to annotate a single photo that it seems it
would be a miracle to be inundated with content
]]
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2004-01-13.html#T16-45-07


Hope that's useful,

Libby


==================================
This is the TEMPORARY discussion list for the W3 Semantic-Photo History
Project. For questions, contact greg@fotonotes.net.

Subscribe Instructions
To:   semantic-photolist-request@unitboy.com
Body: subscribe

Unsubscribe Instructions
To:   semantic-photolist-request@unitboy.com
Body: unsubscribe

Help
To:   semantic-photolist-request@unitboy.com
Body: help
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2004 13:22:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:39 GMT