Some comment on Lane Rasberry's "model release" question: first it seems
from the supporting essays, the underlying purpose of a "model release" is
legal protection for a photographer selling photographs, which wouldn't
apply to Commons. The "model" terminology is somehow not quite right for
the open source movement either, it invokes fashion or "adult" industry
terminology. The definition of a "model" is someone who is paid to
display merchandise.
Finally, if such a thing became available, how would it end up being
used--to require Wikipedians to sign such a release as a precondition of
attending events? We have already seen in the past the unfortunate effects
of such photographs being used against Wikimedians, and disproportionately
against women, by those who politically oppose the Wikimedia movement. I
suspect such a thing would result in less, not more photographs uploaded.
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Alison Cassidy <cooties(a)mac.com> wrote:
Please also bear in mind the ethical concerns around
using images of
children, especially around medical conditions, and their own informed
consent. Children cannot consent to this, so obviously their
parents/guardians can, which makes it legal. However, if they’re
identifiable, they may well grow up to regret having their image associated
with a medical condition, and this may have ramifications for them in later
life. They, as children, had no say in the matter.
Just putting that out there.
— Allie
On Aug 9, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Emily Monroe <emilymonroe03(a)gmail.com> wrote:
One way to obscure the face is, if you're not trying to illustrate facial
features of certain genetic conditions, to crop the face out entirely.
Also, I think the concern is more "Are the parents of the kids aware that
the picture is on Wikipedia and are they okay with it?", and not copyright.
I know people with genetic syndromes, along with some doctors and a lot of
parents of kids with genetic syndromes, have issues with some of the
medical imagery used to portray genetic conditions.
From,
Emily
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The image was removed by Doc James with the edit
summary "Prior person
had a lot more than marfans"
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap