<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> On 24/06/2010 6:17 p.m., Jon Phillips wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:AANLkTil52A4hsrjAe8UYUlrcx-Vqcb-TGWZnO0JkNGQV@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">The second scenario is to fit the box inside the website page container (as you see in the picture.) This would stay relative to the page itself, so it would be possible to scroll down and not see the warning box. However we can then place a "NonPD" Icon next to the download button, so that it is clearly seen when you come to download. A smaller version of the NonPD icon could appear on the gallery list, if the clipart in question has one of the above tags. What do you guys think about this? </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> Cool. But ideally, we don't want these to show to anyone publicly. This could be internal more...I'm more interested in a whole list view of the problematic images and having a way to click, "Hi Author, if you don't respond in 24 hours, then this file is automatically going to be deleted as a violated clipart. Its now hidden, tomorrow deleted." </pre> </blockquote> Why don't we want to show them publically? Wouldn't that boost the confidence in the others, or at the very least warn end users to not use this particular one? Out of 30,000 + cliparts only a few would be so marked. But they would be visible. Currently there is no such indicator other than people's comments, and even then things that should be obvious, aren't. E.g. Sasuke from Naruto is a trademarked character, but it was downloaded quite a few times. Now, if it had a NonPD indicator that download amount might have been less. That's the intent of the warning box anyway. I think it would be possible to only show it to Librarians, but I really don't see the sense in showing it to only select people, since a Librarian is really just like anyone else, except we have a broom and flyspray. I think a warning to the public is more valuable than an "Admin-eyes-only". Can you expand your comments and thinking on this issue, and let us know further in depth? As for your list view / deleting suggestion, that sounds good, however I think there are different degrees of risk. I'm using <ul> <li>"pd_issue", "potential copyright violation" as the first step, where more investigation is needed or other CC licences ,these may or may not be on your list, depending on severity and type of the violation. </li> <li>"copyright violation" for definite ones. These would be on your problematic list. </li> </ul> At the end of the day though, we are aiming for a clean library so, I don't yet know. Your way might be better, but I just think letting end users know the risk level on each clipart, while the clipart are under investigation, is a good thing. Preferably I'd like to do that through the website automatically, so that anonymous users can see the risk with the clipart. Or maybe that can be a registered users benefit? </body> </html>