[okfn-discuss] Annotating Open Images with licence and authorship to prevent copyfraud

[Peter Murray-Rust]

My own tools are very crude. Chris Gutteridge used ImageMagick. It depends
a bit on how they are to be deployed - on the desktop or as a service. The
latter can be useful be would require setting up.



On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Gene Shackman <eval_gene at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Did you mention some tools to use to add in attribution info onto images?
> Where can I find those?
>
> Gene
>
>
>
>
> Gene Shackman, Ph.D.
> The Global Social Change Research Project
> http://gsociology.icaap.org
> Free Resources for Methods in Evaluation and Social Research
> http://gsociology.icaap.org/methods
> ----------
> Applied Sociologist
> ----------
>
>   ------------------------------
>  *From:* Chris Sakkas <sanglorian at gmail.com>
> *To:* Open Knowledge Foundation discussion list <
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 7, 2013 6:27 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [okfn-discuss] [open-science] Annotating Open Images with
> licence and authorship to prevent copyfraud
>
> The original, unwatermarked images could also be archived elsewhere.
> People who strip the attribution out of thoughtlessness or laziness would
> not bother to go into the archive and download the original image. People
> who are conscientious enough to source the original image are also likely
> conscientious enough to attribute correctly after doing so.
>
> *Chris Sakkas
> **Admin of the FOSsil Bank wiki <http://fossilbank.wikidot.com/> and the Living
> Libre blog <http://www.livinglibre.com/> and Twitter feed<https://twitter.com/#%21/living_libre>
> .*
>
>
> On 7 August 2013 05:54, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Rafael Pezzi <rafael.pezzi at ufrgs.br>wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>
> I understand the problem, but also don't like watermarks. It will be
> annoying to see the same watermark in all pictures and images of a paper, a
> book or a website. In my view this would compromise the visual appeal of
> open-licensed works.
>
>
> My primary intention was to stamp scientific (STEM) images - graphs, maps,
> photographs of scientific/medical objects etc. Here I believe the clarity
> of the science is much more important than visual appeal. Provenance and
> attribution are important and usually omitted.
>
> Submission a work that you do not have copyright, i.e. a free licensed
> work, although much easier, is as bad as intentionally removing a
> watermark.
>
>
> I'm not proposing that I stamp free licensed work with *my* authorship but
> that it should be stamped as free licensed work. Again, my primary target
> is science, though I can see the value for cultural works.
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
>
>


-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20130807/61697432/attachment.html>