please change default license on image uploads

When you click "Add Images to..." an article you are presented with the dialog box prompting to search or upload an image. If you upload an image, the default license is "I made this myself and am willing to share it under wikiHow's Terms of Use" However, it is becoming an increasing problem that people are placing self image tags on copyrighted images. I think part of the problem is they don't bother to change the license in the box to "I don't know, I found it on the internet.". This should be the default option, so that we can catch more people who don't put any effort into proper image licensing.

I would fully agree. I am finding an increasing number of users uploading images under the {{self}} template (which is the template applied when they indicate that they made the image themselves, as SudoKing mentioned above) when they are clearly copyrighted, taken off of a search engine, etc. I have found images with big watermarks on them, movie posters, snapshots from TV shows, stock photos, and more, all licensed under the self template. It's difficult to sort through these, too, because they no longer really go into a specific "category" that a person can sort through. If the default category was the "I don't know what the license is" category, which is outlined in the screenshot above, I think we would have better control over all of the incoming, improperly licensed images to the site. When this category is chosen for an image, it is put into the Unlicensed Images category, which is monitored closely by a few editors. I would also support changes in the upload instructions to indicate that proper licensing is important, and if a user is unsure of the license, to choose the category outlined in the screenshot above, so it can be investigated further.

I'd like to also agree and would like to see options be worded differently.

I agree with this, as well. I've also come across a lot of watermarked, screenshot, or otherwise clearly copyrighted images that are licensed as {{self}}, and there are often far too many of these to take care of easily.


...I may have admittedly used a {{self}} tag when I didn't mean too... I had permission to use the image, so things could have been worse. I don't remember the image at the moment, (it was a few months back), but regardless, I would support this.

Looking into this...stay tuned.

Ok, so this is something we can do, but since this increases the likelihood that people who are uploading their own pictures will get asked about licensing, I suggest we edit the {{License}} talk page template to assume good faith. Here is my suggested revision: The last thing we want is for someone who uploaded their own images but just didn't select a license to feel like they're getting harassed by multiple talk page messages accusing them of uploading copyrighted images. If someone uploads several images at once with no license, is there any way we can prevent them from getting multiple templates on their talk page? That is a big concern. Also, I moved this to Collaboration Corner since it's not really a bug that breaks something, but an enhancement we are discussing.

They shouldn't get multiple on their talk page (at least from me) I group them all together and post on the same message

I have a script which does the talk page notifications, if you want to see the source you may :) It groups the images together for each user, posts the template, then adds {{notified}} to the image page.

While image licensing isn't necessarily a huge concern of the community on wikiHow right now, it is indeed a copyrighting issue that must be addressed. I think that this change will be the only efficient way to do so. At any given time if one reviews the Gallery of New Files (most recent images uploaded) you can almost always find an obvious copyrighted photo in there licensed inappropriately...usually under the {{Self}} template. The change mentioned above might not solely fix this issue, but it will be a big improvement. When I am reviewing image licensing I always try to combine licenses, but when we have people uploading 15-20 unlicensed images at once it becomes an issue editing their talk page 15-20 times. This generally happens 1-2 times a week, too. After about 5 or 6 images on one template I generally post a new one anyway, because if you post 15 links in one template all you see is a ton of links and not the content you actually want to see...the information on the template itself. For right now, the script @SudoKing made is very efficient and the best thing we can use for image licensing right now...not only can it resolve all of the unlicensed image issues quickly, it also can appropriately send the template to users and address the issue of too many templates, multiple uploads being dealt with at different times, etc.

Sounds awesome :) Can you explain more to me about how it works? Can you show me an example of it leaving a template about multiple images? What happens after {{notified}} is placed on the image page...then a human (you?) goes through them and deletes the ones that have been sitting there for a while? Sorry I'm not familiar with this process, it's a corner of wikiHow I don't have as much experience in :)\_talk:FireCloud&diff=prev&oldid=6602269 When {{notified}} is placed, the person will (hopefully) reply on that person's talk page, and we can make the necessary changes to the template/image page, or if the image is copyrighted/non-free, we can promptly remove it and thank them for letting us know. If the image has been sitting out for a week, with no replies to the notifier or change to the image page, * All links to the image will be removed and the image deleted

How often would you say this actually happens? I just looked at and most of the images seem to be licensed appropriately. I do occasionally come across this in New Article Boost. I would say maybe 1 out of 100 new writers uploads a series of images that they probably do not have permission to use. I usually remove the images from the article and leave them a note like this:

Half of the time they reply with something along the lines of "Oops! I didn't know". The other half of the time they don't reply but it's not a big deal, because the images aren't in the article anymore, and they essentially are lost in image oblivion.

The "Newimages" is the total list of submitted images - so with the increase usage of the imageadder tool (that derives from Flickr/Commons), a random look would consist of mostly images from the tool, but if you filter out all of those, the majority "so-called self" images are actually copyrighted. Before the imageadder tool came out, I would work with an even ratio of unlicensed and these "self" images every week.

Those words are pretty much my thoughts as well. This is probably still as much of an issue now as it was before the image picker tool was created, the only difference is that now these copyrighted photos get pushed back in the queue due to the amount of [properly licensed] photos being uploaded through the image picker tool. With a quick look at the first page of new files, I found one image that's possibly a copyrighted photo - it has 17 source results on TinEye, including a few copyrighted stock photo type websites. Moving to the second page, I found a dozen photos that were used in this article: Just by the look of them, they appear to be copyrighted photos...I ran a few through TinEye which confirmed my suspicion. Those above are just two examples but they're in the first and second pages of the newly uploaded files right now so they were just uploaded in the past few hours. All of the examples I gave had {{Self}} licensing templates applied to them, when they were definitely not created by the uploader. Two of the photos even had attribution/copyright watermarks on them, but they still had a self template applied.

@Krystle any further input on this? :S

Sorry for the delay :) I was thinking that a better solution might be that instead of putting a default license, we can have "Choose a license" and force the reader to look at the dropdown menu and select one. The top two can be the current default and "I don't know, I found it on the internet." Thoughts?

Total copyright: I use the exact same license with my actual self taken pictures:\_272.JPG This is a bigger issue with just the "Self". It's basically any choosing of the "Self" licenses, including NC (the example I provided). @Krystle Would the wikiHaus be up for revoking/limiting new editors in their choices until they have made a set number of total contributions to allow them to have certain "self license" privileges? This isn't fair to me nor any other good faith contributor whom wishes to upload their own images using these self licenses, when you have others whom wish to circumvent the entire aspect of copyrighting.Edit: Probably I was a little "distracted" last night, but I'll be up for basically just any idea that would deter the amount of copyrights that people use the "I made this image" selections with.....

@Maluniu Doubtful :( We generally avoid making anything more restrictive unless it's clear there's a problem. In this situation the problem is copyrighted images getting uploaded with the wrong license, but in actuality we get very few complaints from copyright holders about their images being used improperly, and when we do, we always delete them on a case-by-case basis. In the bigger picture our "problem" is far smaller than on other sites, such as Tumblr and blogs, where people post copyrighted images as the norm.