Template talk:Email templates/Consent/en

The nospam problem

Please see here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:38, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Representing someone does not even imply ownership

The language of the consent for representatives has the person affirm that they represent another person, without stating they have authority over their copyright, and then launches from the affirmation of representation straight to to the release.

A person can "represent" someone or an entity in many capacities without having any authority over the person's property.

You can also represent a person or entity, and as part of your representation, have only limited authority over specified types of property, or even only certain items of property and not others. Peruse a power of attorney which grants certain powers and not others; grants of limited or restricted Letters Testamentary or of Administration in estates; contracts of representation granting power over some objects and not others, etc. You can also have joint legal authority, or joint ownership, which requires a second person or entity to agree to any release.

The following suggested change I think eliminates this entire problem (change to existing text in green):

I hereby affirm that I choose one:, [name] or [represent copyright holder's name], the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of choose one: [the media work] or [the work depicted in the media] or [both the work depicted and the media] as shown here: choose one: [web page of the content] or [in the attached images/text], and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work.

Thoughts?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:07, 27 November 2016 (UTC)