[Clipart] More nsfw stuff
nicu_gfx at nicubunu.ro
Mon May 3 23:01:23 PDT 2010
On 05/03/2010 11:45 PM, chovynz wrote:
> Hello Librarians, Admins, and Developers.
I am one of those that don't care much about the nudity thing but about
the automatic trace part. We should not allow submission that are just
automatically vectorised photos, what's the point for them? They are not
clipart, who needs them, should better use the original photo.
> 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.
Yup, that's a real problem.
> 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
By "vectorised" do you mean automatically traced like the examples above
or also hand drawn images?
For example if I would submit the source SVG for
http://nicubunu.ro/pictures/fairy-wip.png (I won't, since it is not
clipart), that would require model release?
> 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
I still believe in keeping the barrier to entry as low as possible and
not require many formalities from our contributors.
> 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.
That's a slippery slope. We had people in the past asking for removal of
images with weapons, I believe we had flags asked for removal and so on.
What if tomorrow I will get offended by religious propaganda and aks out
from the default results all crossed and Christianity symbols? (I won't,
I believe in free speech)
> 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".
I think our primary mission is to provide images. Those that want only
parts of it can take the database/content (that's the purpose and PD),
do any selection and use as they see fit.
> 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.
> So; two issues.
> 1. Are these clipart from user:share actually PD? How do we know?
I am confident those break copyright and are not clipart.
> 2. What's the plan for protection for minors from OCAL's side on the
> issue of nsfw and age appropriateness?
I prefer we don't have a plan for that.
nicu :: http://nicubunu.ro :: http://nicubunu.blogspot.com
More information about the clipart