Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Ford Motor Company

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Images of Ford Motor Company

[edit]

This deletion request bears upon the following images from the Category:Taken by Ford Motor Company:

Irrevocability of licenses cannot be invoked in that case —“you cannot stop someone, who has obtained your work under a Creative Commons license, from using the work according to that license”—, because all the images above were obtained when they had a non-commercial clause (you'll notice that every initial upload of the mentioned images above have a CC-by-nc watermark). Please have an attentive look at the discussion on the Commons' village pump.

The other images (the ones I didn't mention) don't need to be deleted. Though, we could have a hostile view from Ford if they ever find out: do we really need to keep the images licensed most likely by mistake? →Diti the penguin — 19:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete all that have a non-permitted licence as a watermark. Even if the original Flickr licence said something else, it is clear that these were never intended by Ford to be free. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 22:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep They made a mistake, this is their problem, the watermark doesn't have juridical value and with Creative Commons licence you can't reverse the licence to another. So CC-BY is right. Vascer (talk) 13:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Question Where did you read that the watermark doesn't have juridical value? The CC wiki? The Copyright Act? Please source your statement. I took my time to explain on the Village Pump as well as here, with information from the CC wiki itself, that the way you obtained the pictures is determinant in determining which license to use. →Diti the penguin — 14:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • The problem is that someone at Ford either can't make up their minds a/or can't deliver the right instructions to whomever uploads this stuff. We've had this problem from god knows when (The earliest i've seen is File:Ford_Escape_Hybrid_(pshot).jpg). And conveniently enough, that image also has this link.

What if I change my mind?

Creative Commons licenses are non-revocable. This means that you cannot stop someone, who has obtained your work under a Creative Commons license, from using the work according to that license. You can stop distributing your work under a Creative Commons license at any time you wish; but this will not withdraw any copies of your work that already exist under a Creative Commons license from circulation, be they verbatim copies, copies included in collective works and/or adaptations of your work. So you need to think carefully when choosing a Creative Commons license to make sure that you are happy for people to be using your work consistent with the terms of the license, even if you later stop distributing your work.

  • So now we're left with a problem: Ford has changed the CC terms, but not before some of us have gotten the image under the less restrictive license. And under CC rules, Ford can't exactly stop us from using the images downloaded/uploaded under the less restrictive license before they had a "change of heart" because many of us can point to the upload stats on Commons and if needed, we can get the activity logs from Flickr and point out that Ford changed the license to something more restrictive after we uploaded the pics here. Or something like that. Someone that is competent in such matters can be abit more clear. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 22:09, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Most of these images were uploaded with a watermark in place limiting use. The watermark never changed; the photos on Wiki show that watermark. The question is whether in dealing with conflicting information that was put up simultaneously, we go with the less or the more restrictive. IFCAR (talk) 22:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Question I just noticed something very damning. Diti, you need to either change the deletion request to include every single image in the category, including all derivative works like File:David_Duchovny.jpg, File:Christensen, Helena (FMC) crop.jpg, etc. Or you have to give a valid argument as to why you didn't include many of the celebrity pics that were cropped from the Ford images. You can't "selectively" go after some images, and let those images stay. File:Ford Escape Hybrid (pshot).jpg has the deletion request, yet not request deletion for File:A Ford Escape Hybrid & David Duchovny.jpg, when both have the same {{Flickr-change-of-license}} tag on them. Either you take the whole enchilada, or you don't take the whole enchilada. You can't be picky.--293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment Did you have a look at the file history of each picture? I selected the copyvios—the images having been obtained (the most important word in your citation above)— with the NC clause, as the first version of each file cleary shows the watermark. I included File:Ford Escape Hybrid (pshot).jpg within the deletion request by mistake, though. I removed it from the above list. →Diti the penguin — 22:34, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: yes, 293.xx, we are talking about the images with watermark in the original version only. The images without the watermark (or without having the watermark cropped) are not for discussion, the license of this images alowed commercial use at the time of the upload here and no other license was given per watermark or metadata. --Martin H. (talk) 23:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, here's the reply I got:

Hi Dimitri, got your email regarding Ford images on the Ford Flickr account - let me look into the issue and get back to you. However I would say that all images were released under CC non-commercial (as per the watermark) so any other use would not be permitted.

I'll let you know if I can get someone from Ford to jump into the discussion and shut it down - looks like a lot of images have to be deleted, unfortunately :-(

Best,
M

But it was on March 3, and nothing happened afterwards. →Diti the penguin — 09:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Please DO NOT do this. They are used in a lot of articles across multiple wikis. If you delete them, the commons unlinker will remove them from the articles and it will be a pain to clean up. I suggest we have a moritorium for a few months until this can be cleaned up. There is no deadline or rush, and removal is only done as a courtesy as Lar suggested below. This entire thing amounts to concern trolling. --Dragon695 (talk)
  •  Comment You can't stop the removal of images that are only for CC-BY-NC and I doubt it would take a month or a few months to replace these images. This deletion request is trolling? If so you need to assume good faith! Bidgee (talk) 11:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete We may have a good case legally – I do not know US-law. In Denmark offers are binding with some exceptions. If the up loader was not Ford it would not be binding, but that does not seem to be the case. Next if “we” were not in good faith or if it would be unfair to uphold the offer it would not be binding. For example say Ford has a car that should cost 25,000 $ and it had a sign with 24,000, $ it would be binding. If the sign however said 1 $ it would not be binding or if the sign said “By Ford for 25,000 $” you could not demand to bye the whole Ford Company for 25,000 $. In my view we do not have good faith if there is a watermark saying something different than the license written in “text”. --MGA73 (talk) 09:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete although await any further details from Ford in response to the request for clarification. Two weeks from March 3 would take us to March 17, I suggest not closing this deletion request until then at the earliest. Where a watermark conflicts with information from the setting on Flickr, it isn't safe for us to simply ignore it and go with the less stringent licensing because that is convenient for us. Where the licensing situation of an image is unclear, as obviously is the case here, images should not be hosted but attempts to clarify the situation should be made. Adambro (talk) 23:14, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agree with Adambro. Ford gave conflicting information similtaniously, with clear CC-NC on the watermark and CC-BY in the tagging. The change of license to CC-NC indicates that was their original intent; despite the initial upload as CC-BY the conflicting license claim in the watermark should at least give pause that the Flickr tag may not have been correct. Ford has been contacted and made aware that some nice images which would be useful for illustrating articles on Ford products could be deleted if we don't hear from them about allowing use under a free license. If we don't hear back in the affirmative,  Delete -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Can I request an extension on this, right now I am busy in school. However, I have already run this by User:Lar in the past and he said we go with the tags on the flickr page at the time the image was uploaded not what is in the watermark. Please take no action until you have spoken with him. I will attempt to get in contact with another admin on en-wp who also can verify this. --Dragon695 (talk) 15:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for the heads up. This is complex in my view... I hope the note to Ford works and they license these images to Commons under a suitable license. If they do not, there are two questions: Were the images intentionally licensed in a Commons compatible way? If not, I think we're fairly clearly obligated (at least in my worldview) to "do the right thing" even if legally we aren't, and delete them. If they were intentionally licensed but now they are not, then I think we have to decide if we want to allow "takebacks" in this case. Our policy on takebacks is that we grant them, as a favor, to contributors in good standing even though we don't have to, as long as doing so won't materially harm the project. Ford's marketing arm (or whatever Ford organization uploaded these on behalf of Ford the corporation) is not a "contributor in good standing" but they are an organization that we might want to do favours for. Especially if we communicate successfully with them and they give us some images we can use.... but that should not be a quid pro quo. So I agree with the call to wait a bit to see what happens. But I also think we do have some unanswered questions we need answers to. And a personal preference question too. ++Lar: t/c 18:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete It's clear that Ford have these images as CC-BY-NC (If theses images hadn't have been watermarked then it would have been different) and if Ford end up letting us use these as CC-BY or CC-BY-SA at a future date then these images could be reuploaded or undeleted. Bidgee (talk) 11:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep If the CC licenses are irrevocable, then these images should be kept. However, if there is a CC clause that states something along the lines of "if two licenses are granted that conflict, then the license is invalid" then the images should be rightfully deleted. OSX (talk) 09:07, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Is anything going to happen with this? It's been a many months now. If we're not going to delete the images, let's take the deletion tags off -- they're not very attractive. IFCAR (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. – some kind of closure is needed here. The consensus is that these images are not under a license that is currently acceptable, and Ford's potential position on this is grudgingly accepting at best. The safe move is to get rid of them; and that's the general agreement anyway. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 12:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Images_of_Ford_Motor_Company&oldid=22169622"