Wikipedia:Image use policy/Proposal
 | The following is a proposed Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption. |
It is my opinion that Wikipedia should make several changes to its image policy to address several concerns. I propose and open to discussion the following:
- Jimbo Wales is on the record saying that {{fairuse}} should be eliminated. I propose that fairuse be eliminated in the following manner: images claiming fairuse uploaded after a given date should be deleted on sight. Images claiming fairuse uploaded before this date should be investigated using {{verifieduse}} and gradually pruned out over time. The exception to this should be corporate logos, book and movie covers, movie posters, CD covers, and similar things.
- I propose that images without tags existing five days after their initial uploaded be elegible for speedy deletion. Images without tags existing before a given date should be given tags.
- There should be a spacific statement that images from Google Maps and Google Earth (as well as other commercial satellite image sites) are not acceptable for Wikipedia; I fear that these sites have the potential to become a problem in the future. There should be a list provided of free sources for satellite and aerial photos.
- WP:PUI and WP:CP could be merged to form one process, given that proposal 2 would dramatically reduce the number of unsourced images.
- Images using tags {{copyrighted}}, {{permission}}, {{noncommercial}}, etc. uploaded after a certain date should be elegible for speedy deletion. These tags should be systematically eliminated.
- New copyright tag categories should be subject to scrutiny.
- Images not .JPG, .GIF, or .PNG should be converted or deleted.
- Unencyclopedic (nonsense) images should be elegible for speedy deletion.
- There should be restrictions on text (see Image:Cnr.jpg) that is part of non-map or non-aerial photo images.
- Whatever else you can think up.
Please note that this is a first draft and as such is subject to change.
I oppose the basic idea of trying to remove all fair-use images. Fair-use is an important right under copyright law, and it should be widely taken advantage of, lest it be effectively deprecated. Furthermore, there are many very important images we can't easily get on any other basis, and which are clearly fair use.
That said, a better image policy is IMO a good idea, and several of your siuggestions I woud agree with. Specifically eliminating untagged images, although I would favor a mandatory notification of the uploader, and a sufficient delay to make it likely that an uploader with imgaes that are in fact free but who is ignorant of ourt process can tag them. This need not be very different from the current WP:PUI in my opnion, but with some standards and policies changed and clarified. Perhaps more importantly, a project could be developed to verify the permission tags on images, ans some sort of special "verified" tag be created that could onl;y be used after a member of such a project had confirmed the status. thsi would be sued only for PD and GFDL images, as a Fair use is always a mattter of context and to some extent of opnion. DES 22:12, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
- If fairuse is to be kept, I would like to see some sort of mechanism to ensure it is not abused.
- Mandatory notfication of the uploader of untagged images is a matter of course; it is an integral part of the existing policy already.
- I agree that there should be some sort of verification process to ensure that the tagging system remains accurate.
- My suggestions are only a starting point for discussion of a better policy.
- Fair use is not a right. It is a legal defense that can be used in certain cases that would otherwise be copyright violations. --Carnildo 22:44, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
- You are correct, it is a legal defense, and a use is only conclusively determined to be fair use if a suit is filed and fair use is invoked as a defese. But the copyright law also explicitly grants the public the right to use copyrighted content in the ways generally covered by the term "fair use", so it is also a right. Similarly "self defense" is a defese to a charge of assult or homicide. But it is also a right, within limits. May rights are pricipally asserted as defenses. indeed "free speech" is primarily legally asserted as a defense to legal attempts at censorship of various kinds. DES 22:55, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
- My main concern with fairuse on Wikpedia is that it can be used as an excuse to upload images that are otherwise copyvios. For example, a image might be listed on CP or PUI, but then uploader to preserve his image can simply slap on a fairuse tag and say it's not a copyvio. Gwk 23:01, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
- You are correct, it is a legal defense, and a use is only conclusively determined to be fair use if a suit is filed and fair use is invoked as a defese. But the copyright law also explicitly grants the public the right to use copyrighted content in the ways generally covered by the term "fair use", so it is also a right. Similarly "self defense" is a defese to a charge of assult or homicide. But it is also a right, within limits. May rights are pricipally asserted as defenses. indeed "free speech" is primarily legally asserted as a defense to legal attempts at censorship of various kinds. DES 22:55, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
- Fair use is not a right. It is a legal defense that can be used in certain cases that would otherwise be copyright violations. --Carnildo 22:44, 21 July 2005 (UTC)