Dear Neotarf, I also had a look at the copyright surrounding the image, and agree with your analysis:
* In any case the image should be CC BY 2.0 - not 2.5. Technically I think this information provides you with the information that allows us to share on Commons and beyond under the CC BY 2.5 conditions, however - though I cannot be sure without reading the consent letter that the parents signed - it seems unlikely that the parents gave such broad permissions concerning the photograph of their daughter. They likely gave permission for publication in the medical journal, not necessarily sharing under a Creative Commons license. Though technically (copyright wise) they do not have to - unless they are the copyright holders of the image. And even if the parents did give permission for the CC license - and this is simply my personal opinion - we should perhaps limit our use of the image on a more ethical standpoint of a half-naked pubescent underage girl. The image was clearly intended for an academic medical context, and although Wikipedia shows it in an encyclopaedic context, I would argue that we should refrain from sharing it and interchange it for an image that shows the syndrome on a more clothed person. It is also possible that personality / image rights laws in Brazil (as well as child pornography laws) come in to play with regards to this image, but I am by no means an expert on those. With kind regards, Lisette Kalshoven -- Kennisland | www.kennisland.nl | t +31205756720 | m +31613943237 | @lnkalshoven | skype: lisette.kalshoven > On 05 Aug 2016, at 13:57, Neotarf <neot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Would someone look at the copyright issues surrounding the image in Marfan > syndrome? This article was mentioned in the Signpost as being worked on in > honor of Kevin Gorman. The image shows a pubescent child, partially clothed, > apparently during a medical exam. The image was uploaded with a CC-by-2.5 > license. But if you go to the copyright information in the case study, it > says the article was published under 2.0 license. There is separate copyright > statement for the image: "Written informed consent was obtained from the > patient's parents for the publication of this case report and accompanying > images. A copy of the consent form is available for review by the > Editor-in-Chief of this journal." It says the child is 13 years old and has > a "global intellectual impairment". > > Is the consent needed for a medical study in Brazil the same type of consent > needed to host an image on Commons? Does the license for the article also > apply to the image of the child? Can someone sort through these issues? > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marfan_syndrome > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marfan_syndrome> > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please > visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
