Another 2nd thought :-)
How should we handle these members? Just like with the random, unrelated photos (which is delete the image, member stays)? Or is there some point where the member should be removed?
The member can be removed if you like.
So going to the next step, these images, when well proven not to be related to Inkscape, can be handled just like spam. Both image and member removed without warning.
Correct?
Thanks again, brynn
-----Original Message----- From: Martin Owens Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 10:06 PM To: brynn ; C R Cc: Inkscape-Devel ; Inkscape-Docs Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] moderation - 'could have been made w/Inkscape'
On Fri, 2017-10-27 at 21:03 -0600, brynn wrote:
When I first was learning about the internet (just before y2k) it was common to see websites prominently posting warnings, and further explaining that the website owner can be held responsible (if users posts anything from another site, without giving credits, whether text or image). Sometimes it was threatened to remove any members who did so.
So that's where I'm coming from. But now, it seems seems the climate has changed. There seems to be a different perspective (and apparently some new regulations too).
This is called the Safe Harbour provisions in US law. As long as we're taking reasonable actions to remove content we have been informed is infringing, we're not culpable (IANAL, this isn't 100% true)
Are you suggesting we could work up some kind of search routine, for when we suspect an image has ownership issues (see my clues below)? If TinEye reports, let's say 6 identical stock images, and there's no connection in user names, why isn't that enough?
It's a fairly high account, but it's slightly possible that the user has uploaded their inkscape image to a stock image site. So it's worth checking for an Author in the stock image sites and see if it matches.
I don't think I can see logins, or emails either. Certainly not IPs. Unless I just haven't found them yet. I've never found a member list or anything like that. If I need to find a member, I can only do it if I know their name (type it into the url).
You can use the username and any other information posted.
These are the clues I had for the images I used for examples (which apparently all are turned out to be fishy).
I think you've got a good list of things to check. Keep this list for future possible documentation for new moderators please.
How should we handle these members? Just like with the random, unrelated photos (which is delete the image, member stays)? Or is there some point where the member should be removed?
The member can be removed if you like.
Here's a current example: https://inkscape.org/en/~techie001 The hidden one is an uploaded link (no image) to an entirely unrelated site (I think music download site). The Lamborghini one echoes several stock images, but I can't investigate (whether it might be "fan art" made with Inkscape) because it's a JPG. Originally it had an external link to a music download site. The green one got no results in TinEye, but had an external link to a game and music download site.
That's a suspicious user, but it's very hard to tell for sure. But you can probably be a bit more critical of this user since as you say in your list, they don't seem to post any actual content other than links.
Best Regards, Martin Owens