Commons talk:Volunteer Response Team

Email message template for release of rights to a file

This release template, which I found at both: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team and within the Commons:Wikimedia VRT release generator, here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wikimedia_VRT_release_generator is misleading and erroneous. My finding is based on experience, namely an email correspondence from Wikimedia Commons personnel which clarified the matter using this information: "We are unable to accept forwarded permission statements or proxy statements for legal reasons. Please ask the copyright holder to email us directly, if possible using the interactive release generator available at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wikimedia_VRT_release_generator" The fact that the form at the previous address includes language that identifies a representative's correspondence being used to fulfill requirements for acceptance of the creator's work for inclusion on WikiMedia Commons, is misleading as this not the case.

Therefore, the release template should have, in my opinion, a better and firmer explanation of what constitutes a "representative" of the copyright holder as well as rules and other parameters for the acceptability of any such representatives work. Else, no representative should be allowed to file directly for a release and should be informed about that limitation in advance. I suggest another reference/footnote be added to the form explaining what the requirements are for such. The explanation should have at least one example. E.g., [1] If you, as an editor, have obtained a written electronic correspondence from the creator of a work, forwarding a copy of that correspondence from the creator will not be sufficient to gain acceptance or grant usage under any license on Wikimedia Commons. Editors must have creators personally submit a release here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wikimedia_VRT_release_generator. An explanation of the only acceptable way to achieve this is represented in a flow chart here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Copyright_consent_--_the_2-stage_process.png

Based on my observations, my previous volunteer Wiki work and rules promulgated by WikiMedia Commons, it should be clear that a "representative" as governed by WikiMedia Commons should have no reasonable expectation to obtain a release directly. Moreover, the representative's role is one in which the representative must cause the creator to apply for said release and this should be made clear to all in advance.

If there is ever to be any circumstance where Wikimedia Commons would forthrightly consider the use of representative's correspondence for copyright release, then the terms of the such must be clearly stated in advance.

I am seeking comment and ideas about how to improve this function.

Where else should this discussion be? Jstengel (talk) 01:54, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

It seems to me that the existing text directing anyone who does not own the copyright to "ask the author to forward the email with their clear statement of permission to permissions-commonswikimedia.org, including the full header and any previously exchanged correspondence with you, and a link to the image on Commons. Make sure to ask the author to include information on the origin (source) of the file and its license" is unambiguous, as is the fact that the section with the form begins, "If you have been directed to this page because you wish to release the rights to a file to which you own the copyright…". Yes, the page addresses two different audiences in two different sections.

Unless I am very mistaken, the legal meaning of "representative" to license intellectual property rights is pretty clear: you have to have legal authority to represent the copyright-holder. Clearly a random Commons user does not have that authority. - Jmabel ! talk 03:57, 16 December 2024 (UTC)