I dont understand where PD is concerned why proof is asked for, have we 
forgotten "Assuming good faith"?

> From: wikimediaindia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Wikimediaindia-l Digest, Vol 35, Issue 16
> To: wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:07:14 +0000
> 
> Send Wikimediaindia-l mailing list submissions to
>       wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>       https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>       wikimediaindia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>       wikimediaindia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikimediaindia-l digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. 13th Meetup of Wikipedians in [[Pune]], [[Maharashtra]] -
>       please note details and register (Ashwin Baindur)
>    2. Fwd: Copyright problems of images from India (Shiju Alex)
>    3. Re: Fwd: Copyright problems of images from India (Bala Jeyaraman)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 11:15:53 +0530
> From: Ashwin Baindur <ashwin.bain...@gmail.com>
> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] 13th Meetup of Wikipedians in [[Pune]],
>       [[Maharashtra]] - please note details and register
> To: "Mailing list for Wikimedians in Pune,    India"
>       <wikimedia-in-...@lists.wikimedia.org>, mr-w...@yahoogroups.com,
>       wikimediaindia-l <wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>,        
> Wikipedians
>       for Indian Nature <wiki_india_nat...@googlegroups.com>,
>       wikimedia-in-mum <wikimedia-in-...@lists.wikimedia.org>,        
> "Agarwal,
>       Shirish" <shirisha...@gmail.com>, "Bagade,      Ashok "
>       <ashok.bag...@gmail.com>,       Col Ashwin Baindur
>       <ashwin.bain...@gmail.com>, "Jogalekar, Sudhanwa "
>       <sudhanwa....@gmail.com>,       "Patankar, Anand"
>       <anandpatan...@gmail.com>, "Rasal,      Prasad" 
> <studiobloss...@gmail.com>,
>       "Sharma, Chandan" <chandan7...@yahoo.com>, "Vaidya,     Prasad"
>       <prasad.vai...@gmail.com>
> Message-ID: <BANLkTimrnYci=Pg=v-x7as+xztuuflq...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> A reminder for the 13th Meetup of Wikipedians in [[Pune]], [[Maharashtra]].
> Please see the[[Wikipedia:Meetup/Pune/Pune13|meetup page]]  for details and
> indicate your attendance.
> The intended purpose of the meetup is:
> <blockquote> '''to discuss the Campus Ambassador Program and forthcoming
> WikiConference 2011'''.</blockquote>
> ''Highlights - '''Hisham Mundol''', National Director, India Program &
> '''Bishakha
> Datta''', Global Trustee, Wikimedia Foundation will be present for the
> meetup.''
> 
> 
> [[User:AshLin|AshLin]] ([[User talk:AshLin|talk]]) 04:13, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
> 
> Warm regards,
> 
> Ashwin Baindur
> ------------------------------------------------------
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/attachments/20110509/2b4437ac/attachment-0001.htm
>  
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 12:37:25 +0200
> From: Shiju Alex <shijualexonl...@gmail.com>
> Subject: [Wikimediaindia-l] Fwd: Copyright problems of images from
>       India
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
>       <foundatio...@lists.wikimedia.org>,     "Discussion list on Indian
>       language projects of Wikimedia."
>       <wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <banlktin0soebfnw9yrocdrmym463udd...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> I am forwarding the below mail on behalf of a Malayalam wikipedian who is
> very active in Wikimedia Commons.
> 
> Of late it is becoming very difficult for many Wikimedians from India to
> contribute to Wikimedia Commons especially if they are uploading historical
> images which are in PD.  We are facing lot of issues (and many a times
> unnecessary controversies also) with the historic images in PD, images of
> wall paintings and statues, and so on. Please see the below mail in which
> Sreejith citing various examples.
> 
> It is almost impossible for the uploaders from India to show proof of the
> century old images of  Hindu Gods and Goddesses. The current policies of
> Commons are not permitting many of the PD images from India citing all sorts
> of policies which might be relevant only in the western world. With these
> type of policies we are going to have serious issues when we try to go for
> GLAM type events.
> 
> But I also do not know the solution for this issue. Requesting constructive
> discussion.
> 
> 
> Shiju Alex
> 
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Sreejith K. <sreejithk2...@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:03 PM
> Subject: Copyright problems of images from India
> To: Shiju Alex <shijualexonl...@gmail.com>
> 
> 
> Shiju,
> 
> As you might be aware already, we are having trouble keeping historical
> images about India in Wikimedia commons. This pertains mostly to images
> about Hindu gods and people who died before 1947.
> 
> Please see the below examples:
> 
>    - File:Narayana
> Guru.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Narayana_Guru.jpg> -
>    This is the image of Sree Narayana
> Guru<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana_Guru>,
>    a Hindu saint, social reformer and is even considered a god by certain
>    castes in Kerala. This image has been tagged as an image with No source.
>    Narayana Guru expired in 1928 and considering the conditions in which India
>    was in during that period and before, it is very difficult to get an image
>    source online. Most active Wikipedians does not have access or information
>    on how old the image is or where a source of it can be found. Any 
> photograph
>    published before 1941 in India is in public domain as per Indian copyright
>    act. Common sense says that this image meets this criteria because the
>    person was long lead before 1941, but we still need proof of the first
>    publishing date. Deleting this image on grounds that no source could be
>    found will only reduce the informative values of all the articles which 
> this
>    image is included in.
>    - File:Aravana.JPG: This image has already been deleted, but you can see
>    the amount of discussion that went in before deleting it. See
> Commons:Deletion
>    
> requests/File:Aravana.JPG<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Aravana.JPG>.
>    (An almost similar image can be found
> here<http://www.flickr.com/photos/anoopp/5706721852/in/photostream/>.)This
>    image as put for deletion because it had the image of Swami
> Ayyappan<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Ayyappan>in it. Ayyappan,
> a popular god of Kerala, has his image circulated
>    everywhere on the plant with no proof of copyrights. It makes sense to
>    believe that this image is not eligible for copyright because
>    Hindu deities are all common property, but again, Commons need proof that
>    the image is in public domain. This is the same case with all Hindu
>    gods/goddesses. The images can only be kept in Commons if the uploader can
>    provide proof that the images are in public domain.
>    - File:Kottarathil
> sankunni.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kottarathil_sankunni.jpg>:
>    This is a picture of Kottarathil
> Sankunni<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kottarathil_Sankunni>,
>    the author of the famous book
> Aithiyamaala<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aithihyamala>.
>    Kottarathil Sankunni died in 1937 and so it makes sense to believe that 
> this
>    image was created on or before 1937 and thus falls in Public Domain. But
>    some people in Commons is refusing to believe that and is asking for proof.
>    Now it becomes the responsibility of the uploader to show proof that this
>    image was published 60 years before today. The editor who nominated the
>    image for deletion is on the safer side because it is not his 
> responsibility
>    to prove that the image is a copyright violation. So long story short,
>    anyone can nominate any image for copyright violation and it becomes the
>    uploaders responsibility to prove that its not. The deletion nomination 
> need
>    not be accompanied with a reason for disbelief.
>    - File:Anoop
> Menon.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anoop_Menon.jpg>:
>    This is the picture of Anoop
> Menon<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anoop_Menon>,
>    a popular actor from Kerala. A discussion is going on about the uploaders
>    credibility whether he is the original photographer of this image. Please
>    see File talk:Anoop
> Menon.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Anoop_Menon.jpg>.
>    The reason for doubting the uploader is simple. This image has professional
>    quality and so the uploader cannot be the copyright owner because this is
>    his first upload. Strange? Now, it becomes the responsibility of the
>    uploader to prove that he took this image and I do not know how and nor 
> does
>    the person who is arguing for it. He claims that the uploader can upload 
> the
>    full resolution image with EXIF but whats even funny is that most of images
>    from the person who is saying this does not meet this criteria. Again, back
>    to round 1 in my first example. Its the responsibility of the uploader to
>    prove his image and anyone can doubt him for any stupid reason and commons
>    hardly cares.
> 
> As you can see, it is getting quite difficult to maintain images from India
> in commons. India is a country which has only started to use Internet less
> than a decade ago and we still do not have many of our countries' books or
> sources of information online. So any image from India which gets nominated
> for deletion in Wikimedia Commons get deleted for absence of proof. Commons
> is ruled by *precautionary principle*, where in they are not willing to take
> any risks on copyright and will delete any image for which anyone has
> doubts. This is in contrary to local wikipedia projects in India where it is
> rules by the *good faith principle* where we will trust the uploader and it
> becomes the responsibility of the nominator to prove that the image has
> false copyright claim.
> 
> This issue is beginning to hurt the contents from India. If we can do
> something, its time we act immediately. If we are just going to just spent
> out time discussing about it, the pictures of all Hindu gods and people who
> died before independence might get deleted by that time.
> 
> Regards,
> Sreejith K.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/attachments/20110510/c986b84c/attachment-0001.htm
>  
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 16:37:12 +0530
> From: Bala Jeyaraman <sodabot...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Fwd: Copyright problems of images from
>       India
> To: Wikimedia India Community list
>       <wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <BANLkTi=S8U-55_EmShLVOgWbNJbnT=t...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> 1) >>Ayyappan, a popular god of Kerala, has his image circulated everywhere
> on the plant with no proof of copyrights. It makes sense to believe that
> this image is not eligible for copyright because Hindu deities are all
> common property,
> 
> i have to disagree with this. All images of Hindu deities are not public
> property. Most of the popular images were done by painters some time in the
> immediate past - Ravi varma's paintings form the base for many deity images.
> Similarly there are many unknown temple artists, who have gone uncredite
> because of our practice of gross insensitivity to others' copyright.
> Claiming that deity images are not eligible for copyright is wrong. They do
> have copyright and unless there is iron clad proof of publication, dont
> decalre them to be in public domain. The fairuse clause is there for cases
> like this.
> 
> 
> 2) While i understand what sreejith is saying, repeated copyright violations
> in commons by Indian uploaders is mainly to blame for this backlash. In Ta
> wiki and in commons, i have to repeat many times to people that "everything
> that comes out of google image search is not free". In my experience, about
> half the people react defensively to such advice and reflexively claim the
> image is "own work" and they "took it". They do not like being pointed out
> they are wrong and thus damage the reputation of Indian uploaders further.
> Many of the regular commons users thus become immediately suspicious when a
> new indian user claims that an image is "own work". Even in the outreach
> programs i participated, people listen to me drone about how taking images
> of google image search is not ok and do the same the immediately after. This
> issue is not restricted to Indian users, but is a major problem for us. The
> only way to deal with this is a relentless copyright awareness campaign for
> Indian users.
> 
> 3) Images of people who died prior to 1951. Here too the case is not clear.
> Many photos of such people are reconstructive work done post-1951.
> Colourisation of black and white pictures is a major concern. I am still not
> clear, if colourisation passes the originality threshold and becomes a
> original work on its own. If so, then such a work cannot be claimed as PD.
> 
> Personally i add a ton of descriptive information and long arguments to
> prove PD in india and in case of my own images, i always upload with full
> resolution and metadata. It is a sad bad situation, but the root cause is
> relative ignorance of Indians (including me) about copyright.
> 
> regards
> Bala
> 
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Shiju Alex <shijualexonl...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I am forwarding the below mail on behalf of a Malayalam wikipedian who is
> > very active in Wikimedia Commons.
> >
> > Of late it is becoming very difficult for many Wikimedians from India to
> > contribute to Wikimedia Commons especially if they are uploading historical
> > images which are in PD.  We are facing lot of issues (and many a times
> > unnecessary controversies also) with the historic images in PD, images of
> > wall paintings and statues, and so on. Please see the below mail in which
> > Sreejith citing various examples.
> >
> > It is almost impossible for the uploaders from India to show proof of the
> > century old images of  Hindu Gods and Goddesses. The current policies of
> > Commons are not permitting many of the PD images from India citing all sorts
> > of policies which might be relevant only in the western world. With these
> > type of policies we are going to have serious issues when we try to go for
> > GLAM type events.
> >
> > But I also do not know the solution for this issue. Requesting constructive
> > discussion.
> >
> >
> > Shiju Alex
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Sreejith K. <sreejithk2...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:03 PM
> > Subject: Copyright problems of images from India
> > To: Shiju Alex <shijualexonl...@gmail.com>
> >
> >
> > Shiju,
> >
> > As you might be aware already, we are having trouble keeping historical
> > images about India in Wikimedia commons. This pertains mostly to images
> > about Hindu gods and people who died before 1947.
> >
> > Please see the below examples:
> >
> >    - File:Narayana 
> > Guru.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Narayana_Guru.jpg> -
> >    This is the image of Sree Narayana 
> > Guru<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana_Guru>,
> >    a Hindu saint, social reformer and is even considered a god by certain
> >    castes in Kerala. This image has been tagged as an image with No source.
> >    Narayana Guru expired in 1928 and considering the conditions in which 
> > India
> >    was in during that period and before, it is very difficult to get an 
> > image
> >    source online. Most active Wikipedians does not have access or 
> > information
> >    on how old the image is or where a source of it can be found. Any 
> > photograph
> >    published before 1941 in India is in public domain as per Indian 
> > copyright
> >    act. Common sense says that this image meets this criteria because the
> >    person was long lead before 1941, but we still need proof of the first
> >    publishing date. Deleting this image on grounds that no source could be
> >    found will only reduce the informative values of all the articles which 
> > this
> >    image is included in.
> >    - File:Aravana.JPG: This image has already been deleted, but you can
> >    see the amount of discussion that went in before deleting it. See 
> > Commons:Deletion
> >    
> > requests/File:Aravana.JPG<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Aravana.JPG>.
> >    (An almost similar image can be found 
> > here<http://www.flickr.com/photos/anoopp/5706721852/in/photostream/>.)This
> >    image as put for deletion because it had the image of Swami 
> > Ayyappan<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Ayyappan>in it. Ayyappan, a 
> > popular god of Kerala, has his image circulated
> >    everywhere on the plant with no proof of copyrights. It makes sense to
> >    believe that this image is not eligible for copyright because
> >    Hindu deities are all common property, but again, Commons need proof that
> >    the image is in public domain. This is the same case with all Hindu
> >    gods/goddesses. The images can only be kept in Commons if the uploader 
> > can
> >    provide proof that the images are in public domain.
> >    - File:Kottarathil 
> > sankunni.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kottarathil_sankunni.jpg>:
> >    This is a picture of Kottarathil 
> > Sankunni<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kottarathil_Sankunni>,
> >    the author of the famous book 
> > Aithiyamaala<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aithihyamala>.
> >    Kottarathil Sankunni died in 1937 and so it makes sense to believe that 
> > this
> >    image was created on or before 1937 and thus falls in Public Domain. But
> >    some people in Commons is refusing to believe that and is asking for 
> > proof.
> >    Now it becomes the responsibility of the uploader to show proof that this
> >    image was published 60 years before today. The editor who nominated the
> >    image for deletion is on the safer side because it is not his 
> > responsibility
> >    to prove that the image is a copyright violation. So long story short,
> >    anyone can nominate any image for copyright violation and it becomes the
> >    uploaders responsibility to prove that its not. The deletion nomination 
> > need
> >    not be accompanied with a reason for disbelief.
> >    - File:Anoop 
> > Menon.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anoop_Menon.jpg>:
> >    This is the picture of Anoop 
> > Menon<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anoop_Menon>,
> >    a popular actor from Kerala. A discussion is going on about the uploaders
> >    credibility whether he is the original photographer of this image. Please
> >    see File talk:Anoop 
> > Menon.jpg<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Anoop_Menon.jpg>.
> >    The reason for doubting the uploader is simple. This image has 
> > professional
> >    quality and so the uploader cannot be the copyright owner because this is
> >    his first upload. Strange? Now, it becomes the responsibility of the
> >    uploader to prove that he took this image and I do not know how and nor 
> > does
> >    the person who is arguing for it. He claims that the uploader can upload 
> > the
> >    full resolution image with EXIF but whats even funny is that most of 
> > images
> >    from the person who is saying this does not meet this criteria. Again, 
> > back
> >    to round 1 in my first example. Its the responsibility of the uploader to
> >    prove his image and anyone can doubt him for any stupid reason and 
> > commons
> >    hardly cares.
> >
> > As you can see, it is getting quite difficult to maintain images from India
> > in commons. India is a country which has only started to use Internet less
> > than a decade ago and we still do not have many of our countries' books or
> > sources of information online. So any image from India which gets nominated
> > for deletion in Wikimedia Commons get deleted for absence of proof. Commons
> > is ruled by *precautionary principle*, where in they are not willing to
> > take any risks on copyright and will delete any image for which anyone has
> > doubts. This is in contrary to local wikipedia projects in India where it is
> > rules by the *good faith principle* where we will trust the uploader and
> > it becomes the responsibility of the nominator to prove that the image has
> > false copyright claim.
> >
> > This issue is beginning to hurt the contents from India. If we can do
> > something, its time we act immediately. If we are just going to just spent
> > out time discussing about it, the pictures of all Hindu gods and people who
> > died before independence might get deleted by that time.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Sreejith K.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
> >
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaindia-l/attachments/20110510/06d99b92/attachment.htm
>  
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
> 
> 
> End of Wikimediaindia-l Digest, Vol 35, Issue 16
> ************************************************
                                          
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Reply via email to