- From: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:16:05 +0000 (GMT)
- To: semantic-photolist@unitboy.com
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 UTC