[Clipart] More nsfw stuff
oneminuteinspirations at gmail.com
Mon May 3 19:36:17 PDT 2010
First, congrats on the new baby, Seb! Getting any sleep?
Second, NSFW does not necessarily mean pornographic. You'll find lots
of nudes in respected museums. They're "Not Safe For Work" mostly
because fears of sexual harrassment lawsuits create a very restrictive
environment in American workplaces. NSFW covers a wide variety of
potentially offensive material that could be considered contributing
to a "hostile work environment" if it enters the office.
I've contributed some NSFW stuff. I think they're artistic and add to
the variety and usefulness of the library. They were flagged NSFW
under the old system.
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Seb <sebastien.lanteigne at gmail.com> wrote:
> About NSFW. Imo NSFW is not appropriate. Simply because of the nature
> of this site. It's very likely that kids will be using it in a context
> that is not "at work". the answer is pretty simple. You add a check
> box to the upload form. "Does this image contain Nudity?" Then have a
> filter to block it.
> I may seem a bit extreme here but I personally think that, again
> because of the nature of the site, the filter should be ON by default.
> Simply becasue most kids will lack the knowledge to turn it ON, or
> more to the point won't even know to look for a filter. On the other
> hand most adults should be able to remove it quite easily. My daughter
> is only 22 days old so it won't be an issue but in the future I hope
> she will use this site and I like to hope that everything will be done
> to make her experience a good one.
> On the issue of PD or not for the images. The issue is much wider.
> Ford argues you are breaking copyrights if you distribute pictures of
> your Ford car. Now would we remove are clip art of a ford mustang?
> Definitely not, unless maybe ford threatened to sue.
> There is only one direction to take. Respond to take down notice as
> they come. It is impossible to check everything. I think even a judge
> would agree that you can't possibly be expected to to verify every
> picture of a nude women found on the web. But sure at some point
> someone will say:" hey this is my picture. Stop using it.". At that
> point we will need to ask the user to either prove that he is the
> rightful owner of that design, that it is PD or have it removed.
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:45 AM, chovynz <chovynz at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello Librarians, Admins, and Developers.
>> Do you reckon this person is vectorising images that are not his? I'm
>> starting to suspect so since the two females are different people.
>> Basically, we have no proof that these are PD anymore, and no way (that I
>> know of) of contacting him and asking.
>> What could we do to
>> help protect OCAL first (obviously if someone complains of copyright
>> violation, we take it down, but by then it would probably have already been
>> on OCAL for awhile,)
>> secondly, protect the people in the cliparts - remembering that PD clipart
>> can be used for any purpose including commercial or defamation,
>> thirdly protection of the Users of OCAL - it would be very easy for someone
>> to download these cliparts and unknowningly use a copyrighted image,
>> fourthly I personally don't want to see OCAL become a repository for porn.
>> There is so much more uses for a PD library than that. If that happens then
>> yes, OCAL DOES need filters that work properly. It looks like there is a
>> trend of uploading these types of images.
>> Would it be a good idea for every clipart that has a vectorised person in it
>> like these to have a model release form uploaded as well? I previously
>> thought that was too restrictive, but am starting to think it would be a
>> good idea. Also I would like to see all NSFW checked cliparts to not appear
>> in any search. I suggest a nsfw toggle in the users preferences that they
>> can display nsfw clipart if they choose to. By default this would be off.
>> I'm quite serious about the porn repository issue. Schools and universities
>> cannot use OCAL until it is a "safe" environment. I don't like to let my 6
>> year olds or other kids on OCAL until I know they won't find things. (For
>> the moment, I go hunting and print out appropriate pictures for them to draw
>> on and colour in - but searches like "girl", and "green", "stand", "school"
>> will show some things that are not age appropriate.) Same goes for churches.
>> They won't like to use this until there is some "safety".
>> If we as OCAL are going to supply PD images (which is great!) then we also
>> need to provide protection for minors, and for age.
>> More support for this stance :
>> If there is background work going on, on the nsfw issues, then please let us
>> know. From my point of view, nothing is happening. Feel free to correct me
>> if I'm wrong.
>> So; two issues.
>> 1. Are these clipart from user:share actually PD? How do we know?
>> 2. What's the plan for protection for minors from OCAL's side on the issue
>> of nsfw and age appropriateness?
>> clipart mailing list
>> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
> clipart mailing list
> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
More information about the clipart