The Latuff cartoons - Commons-l - lists.wikimedia.org

Pedro Sanchez

6 Jun 6 Jun

5:54 p.m.

On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Dror Kamir <dqamir(a)bezeqint.net> wrote:

This discussion was probably discussed before. It has to be discussed again. I would like the members of this list to express their opinion about the following:

Why it has to be discussed again if it' has been discussed before? Should we rediscuss everything that has been discussed before? Perhaps you would like to argument why a rediscussion is necessary at this point.

Reply

Michael Maggs

6:57 p.m.

This has already been discussed at great length on wiki. We all know you disagree with the conclusion. There is really nothing else to be said. Michael Dror Kamir wrote:

...

This discussion was probably discussed before. It has to be discussed again. I would like the members of this list to express their opinion about the following: 1. Why are these cartoons on the Commons, considering they educational value is dubious, as they merely express one person's opinion and are not documentary in any way or present useful sketches or other productive material. 2. Why are these cartoons categorized in a way that force user to see them even if they prefer to avoid them. In particular - why a person who looks for Allan Dershowitz's portrait should be forced to see a cartoon that defames him in the most harsh way? (There are other similar examples, but that's the most critical.) 3. Latuff released his cartoons to the public domain. My attempt to upload paraphrases of these cartoons was banned by a few administrators. Is that acceptable on Commons' users? Isn't that a breach of the "fair play" rules and "no censorship" rules? Why would uploading the Israeli flag with a ban sign on it and the inscription "no Israel" is okay, while uploading paraphrases on Latuff's cartoons would be banned? 4. Should the Commons welcome new political cartoons which express personal opinions about ongoing events, and isn't that a risk to the project? If the Commons should welcome these cartoons, who has the right to decide whom of the caricaturists is notable, which of the caricatures is educational etc.? Please express your opinions, it is highly important. Dror (K) _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

Reply

Eugene Zelenko

4:09 p.m.

Hi! Sorry, I can't understand how resolution about BLP may be applied to media files. How much files will remain in Commons, if only media about notable persons or works of notable persons will be included? Media in question is about ethnic conflict (definitely notable itself), so I don't think that BPL applies there. Eugene. On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 12:47 AM, Ting Chen<wing.philopp(a)gmx.de> wrote:

...

Hello, Indeed the situation had changed since the last discussion. On the April board meeting the Board of Trustees of the WMF had issued a resolution about BLP. This resolution includes Commons. So please check if the said images on in accordance with the spirit of the resolution. Thank you very much. Ting Michael Maggs wrote:

This has already been discussed at great length on wiki. We all know you disagree with the conclusion. There is really nothing else to be said. Michael Dror Kamir wrote:

This discussion was probably discussed before. It has to be discussed again. I would like the members of this list to express their opinion about the following: 1. Why are these cartoons on the Commons, considering they educational value is dubious, as they merely express one person's opinion and are not documentary in any way or present useful sketches or other productive material. 2. Why are these cartoons categorized in a way that force user to see them even if they prefer to avoid them. In particular - why a person who looks for Allan Dershowitz's portrait should be forced to see a cartoon that defames him in the most harsh way? (There are other similar examples, but that's the most critical.) 3. Latuff released his cartoons to the public domain. My attempt to upload paraphrases of these cartoons was banned by a few administrators. Is that acceptable on Commons' users? Isn't that a breach of the "fair play" rules and "no censorship" rules? Why would uploading the Israeli flag with a ban sign on it and the inscription "no Israel" is okay, while uploading paraphrases on Latuff's cartoons would be banned? 4. Should the Commons welcome new political cartoons which express personal opinions about ongoing events, and isn't that a risk to the project? If the Commons should welcome these cartoons, who has the right to decide whom of the caricaturists is notable, which of the caricatures is educational etc.? Please express your opinions, it is highly important. Dror (K) _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

-- Ting Ting's Blog: http://wingphilopp.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

Reply

Geoffrey Plourde

10:37 p.m.

Ting, I think you hit it on the nose. Just because people can draw whatever they want and license it freely does not mean that we should host it. When we consider the spirit of the new BLP policy, it is clear that all content pertaining to living persons is applicable. The key word is not and never was biographies, as some persons at the Commons discussion appear to believe. The key words are living persons. Any content hosted on a Wikimedia project has the potential for harm. The world of the 21st century looks to Wikimedia for information. While we have never asked for this, circumstances beyond our control have forced it upon us. The potential for harm means that we must take action to prevent harm being done, either intentionally or unintentionally. When we consider the Latuff cartoon that our esteemed colleague Mr. Kamir wishes to remove, we should notice the strength of his argument. 1) The cartoon was commissioned as a attack by an enemy of the subject 2) The cartoon is defamatory to the subject 3) The tone of the cartoon is antisemitic While the subject has addressed it, we should not associate this defamatory cartoon with him. ________________________________ From: Ting Chen <wing.philopp(a)gmx.de> To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List <commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2009 11:58:41 AM Subject: Re: [Commons-l] The Latuff cartoons Media files that vioate a living person's dignity is certainly in scope of the resolution. Because it is a comment and remark to that person, and in a way that violates the resolution. Ting Eugene Zelenko wrote:

...

Hi! Sorry, I can't understand how resolution about BLP may be applied to media files. How much files will remain in Commons, if only media about notable persons or works of notable persons will be included? Media in question is about ethnic conflict (definitely notable itself), so I don't think that BPL applies there. Eugene. On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 12:47 AM, Ting Chen<wing.philopp(a)gmx.de> wrote:

Hello, Indeed the situation had changed since the last discussion. On the April board meeting the Board of Trustees of the WMF had issued a resolution about BLP. This resolution includes Commons. So please check if the said images on in accordance with the spirit of the resolution. Thank you very much. Ting Michael Maggs wrote:

This has already been discussed at great length on wiki. We all know you disagree with the conclusion. There is really nothing else to be said. Michael Dror Kamir wrote:

This discussion was probably discussed before. It has to be discussed again. I would like the members of this list to express their opinion about the following: 1. Why are these cartoons on the Commons, considering they educational value is dubious, as they merely express one person's opinion and are not documentary in any way or present useful sketches or other productive material. 2. Why are these cartoons categorized in a way that force user to see them even if they prefer to avoid them. In particular - why a person who looks for Allan Dershowitz's portrait should be forced to see a cartoon that defames him in the most harsh way? (There are other similar examples, but that's the most critical.) 3. Latuff released his cartoons to the public domain. My attempt to upload paraphrases of these cartoons was banned by a few administrators. Is that acceptable on Commons' users? Isn't that a breach of the "fair play" rules and "no censorship" rules? Why would uploading the Israeli flag with a ban sign on it and the inscription "no Israel" is okay, while uploading paraphrases on Latuff's cartoons would be banned? 4. Should the Commons welcome new political cartoons which express personal opinions about ongoing events, and isn't that a risk to the project? If the Commons should welcome these cartoons, who has the right to decide whom of the caricaturists is notable, which of the caricatures is educational etc.? Please express your opinions, it is highly important. Dror (K) _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

-- Ting Ting's Blog: http://wingphilopp.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

-- Ting Ting's Blog: http://wingphilopp.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

Reply