User talk:Whym

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search


In regard to (perhaps) the vague exception "The expression is reasonably a matter of interest within the society.", I think that the fair extent of the exception would allow photographs depicting a public figure (famous politicians, singers, actors or actresses, television presenters, sportspeople, enterpreneurs, scientists, writers, etc.) doing about their usual work or participating public events or celebrations, or more broadly, a regular person promoting his/her political/social opinion in pubilc (protest, press conference, etc.) also. However, your interpretation is extremely narrower than mine, only "photographs of a politician speaking in public" are obviously ok. I think that Japanese society seems to have an attitude against photography even for public figures, especially the attitude is prevalent in entertainment industry. Doesn't Japan consider balance between freedom of expreesion and personality rights as one of the free democratic countries? If that's true, the restriction would significantly affect one of the fundermental principle of Wikimedia projects, the licensing policy of Wikimedia foundation. for example, the policy does almost not allow fair use photographs of a living person under EDP, so if we fail to get freely-licensed images due to the restriction, the policy will not correctly work at all. --Puramyun31 (talk) 00:15, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not a lawyer, but my general understanding is that copyright-wise there is no restriction on taking and publishing photographs of public figures in public places. They might have {{personality rights}} and commercial rights (as for the entertainment industry) - the discussion you cite (ja:Wikipedia:井戸端/subj/人物画像の掲載について) is primarily talking about those rights and an (editor's, not the whole community's) idea for the community to possibly be more protective of the celebrities' commercial interest in order to better keep good connection with them, such as by asking them for permission to publish a specific photograph regardless of copyright (as most of the mainstream Japanese presses do). When in conflict, the courts do consider the balance and explicitly mention it in rulings. We might want to delete picture with excessive disgrace etc (Commons:Courtesy deletion) on Commons, but that would be case-by-case basis. whym (talk) 00:28, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
So, does your anewer mean the behavior of the Japanese Wikipedia editors is based on common customary, regardless what the law defines? but according to the image use policy of Japanese Wikipedia defines the exceptions of personality rights which include photos depicting politicians, presidents of public organizations, director of corporate serving their official duty or speeching in a official event, but other types of public figures are not mentioned. --Puramyun31 (talk) 03:04, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Basically yes, it appears more like courtesy, than legal binding, about which the Japanese Wikipedia community as a whole does not seem to have a cohesive opinion. Politicians and presidents of companies are mentioned as ok because there is almost no doubt with it. Other types of public figures are just unmentioned, not listed as forbidden. As I mentioned earlier, there seems to be a considerably large gray area to me. It does not mean that I am against to distributing those photographs of sportspeople, protests etc - I just meant to say that those subjects would have a relatively better chance to win a case than politicians' over portraits of them doing their business (on which politicians would have little hope to win). We would have to weigh it along with other factors such as the place, context and expression. As for me, I have not actively considered deleting photographs of Japanese celebrities or sportspeople doing their normal business. However, I can only say they are probably ok, since I don't know of a clear ruling. whym (talk) 03:54, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. you give me a best information what you can do. regards. :-) --Puramyun31 (talk) 04:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
By the way, I think that the current version of Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements#Japan is little helpful to determine what is OK or not and shall be rewritten, if a new case law or statute are established. Now I understand the suppression of the expression depicting people even for public figures in Japan is not only caused by the strictness of the law, but also caused by the ambiguity of the law. --Puramyun31 (talk) 07:37, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements#Japan (2)[edit]

Konbanwa Whym, recently the discussion as I cite earlier (ja:Wikipedia:井戸端/subj/人物画像の掲載について) has been re-started. Can we take the issue to Commons and discuss with Japanese Wikipedia community together? I think that the discussion may give a hint how to deal with photographs of Japanese celebrities on Commons. If necessary, we may need to consult with WMF too. --Puramyun31 (talk) 10:42, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

So far I don't see a major new information in the revived discussion. Going forward, I could be of help when translating opinions from Commons and presenting them to Japanese Wikipedia, if that is useful. I'm not confident about doing the other way around, partly because discussions in general on Japanese Wikipedia tend to be a lot more messy than on Commons, and because my ablility to write in English is more limited than reading. whym (talk) 13:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

I think your answer is mostly correct, However, There are examples which say about the position of Japanese entertainment/sports industry regarding The right of publicity in the discussion:,, They claim that they have a powerright to control even just taking a picture of their personel regardless whether they are "public figure" and acting in public in the cited pages. Although I'm not sure whether and how they impose the right of the likeness of their personel in practice as they said, but it's clear that the argument of Japanese entertainment/sports industry is contradictory to our explaination about The right of publicity, which says the scope of protection of the right is limited to commercial use and does not affect the hosting of an image on Commons. If Japanese courts uphold (or already upheld) their argument in real world court cases, we will (would) need a major amendment of COM:IDENT policy and this project will (would) be seriously damaged by the decisions. --Puramyun31 (talk) 06:13, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Photo challenge-translations[edit]

Hello Whym,
I saw that you did some translations for the Commons:Photo challenge page to Japanese and wanted to ask if you are still interested in translating texts for this project. If you are, there are several things that could be translated: a) the page itself was just actualised, b) we started to translate the challenge descriptions themselves (so far only with langswitch), and c) I just posted translations to French and English for the watchlist notice (MediaWiki talk:WatchlistNotice - the last entry), where other languages could be added.
Best wishes, --Anna reg (talk) 12:24, 2 July 2014 (UTC)