[mb-users] Why do we have a "X Has Picture at Y" relationship?

[Alex Dupuy]

Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> 
> My concern with the "artist has picture at" AR is actually that we don't
> capture enough info.  Yes we can have multiple images, but the main reason
> we might do so is because people age.  In my opinion, we ought to also be
> trying to capture what year the photo was taken.  (The age of the person
> can
> then be worked out from their birthdate+year the photo was taken).
> 
> As for which photos, I think it ought to be limited to artist-chosen
> images,
> if possible - publicity images, rather than papparazzi or amateur
> shots.
> 


Gecks wrote:
> 
> in addition to the points raised:
> 1) many artist photos are NOT free to use (photographer's being picky
> about
> their copyrights, etc)
> 2) we'd need a similar system to the CoverArtSites feature to stop us
> leaching bandwidth without permission
> 

I don't think that these are sufficient argument to call for the elimination
of the AR, but it does seem that guidelines along the line of CoverArtSites
would be appropriate.  However, there are plenty of GDPL pictures at
Wikipedia that can be used as well as elsewhere.  As for associating a date
with the picture, this is an excellent idea, and easily implemented using
the existing AR by specifying the year as start and end date.

@alex
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-do-we-have-a-%22X-Has-Picture-at-Y%22-relationship--tf4489007s2885.html#a13053407
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.