[Clipart] More nsfw stuff
chovynz at gmail.com
Mon May 3 19:49:52 PDT 2010
Yeah, I agree. "NSFW" is the current term we are using (from the old site),
but I'm lumping most things "nude" in with that. (You could argue that
someone's brains splattered on the sidewalk, or anything with drugs or
promoting drugs, is also classified as NSFW, - and that doesn't have any
nudity. The point is these cliparts are just not suitable for some people.)
I guess what I'm trying to say is, let's make this a fantastic (safe) place
for kids, as well as adults who can choose to see the other sides of life
and can think through the related issues. I'm *not *saying "remove them from
the Library", I am saying, "the default settings should hide these things".
People will find if they search hard enough.
After we put these safeguards in place, then, it's up to the peoples
By the way Greg, even under the new system I would still classify your
nudiepics as nsfw. Those specific cliparts are some of the things I don't
want my little girls to see (and copy!) when they are searching for pictures
of apples and "school" to colour in.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Greg Bulmash <
oneminuteinspirations at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
> > Seb.
> > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:45 AM, chovynz <chovynz at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hello Librarians, Admins, and Developers.
> >> http://www.openclipart.org/user-detail/share
> >> 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
> >> 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
> >> on OCAL for awhile,)
> >> secondly, protect the people in the cliparts - remembering that PD
> >> can be used for any purpose including commercial or defamation,
> >> thirdly protection of the Users of OCAL - it would be very easy for
> >> to download these cliparts and unknowningly use a copyrighted image,
> >> fourthly I personally don't want to see OCAL become a repository for
> >> There is so much more uses for a PD library than that. If that happens
> >> 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
> >> in any search. I suggest a nsfw toggle in the users preferences that
> >> can display nsfw clipart if they choose to. By default this would be
> >> I'm quite serious about the porn repository issue. Schools and
> >> cannot use OCAL until it is a "safe" environment. I don't like to let my
> >> year olds or other kids on OCAL until I know they won't find things.
> >> the moment, I go hunting and print out appropriate pictures for them to
> >> on and colour in - but searches like "girl", and "green", "stand",
> >> will show some things that are not age appropriate.) Same goes for
> >> 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
> >> need to provide protection for minors, and for age.
> >> More support for this stance :
> >> https://answers.launchpad.net/openclipart/+question/107881
> >> 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
> >> 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
> >> of nsfw and age appropriateness?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the clipart