On 10/20/05, uninvited(a)nerstrand.net <uninvited(a)nerstrand.net> wrote:
I don't care much about this particular image, but I see this as a
bellwether for the broader issue of dealing with the thousands of
images we have where there is a doubtful fair use claim being made by
the uploader. The process for handling such images is unclear, at
least to me, with the IFD, PUI, and CV (copyright violations) pages
having overlapping purpose and conflicting processes. Any of these
processes are cumbersome, with notification required to the uploader
and ongoing monitoring to shepherd the image through the process. And
all of these processes are heavily biased towards inclusion. Decisions
to keep fair use images are being made by admins who don't understand
fair use and don't appreciate the stakes.
I believe CV is for copyright violations, PUI is for unfree (or possibly
unfree) images which aren't necessarily copyright violations, and IFD is for
the rest. In this case, I'd say the image was clearly unfree, and probably
not a copyright violation, so PUI is probably the right place for it.
But none of this should be necessary simply to remove the image from the
article(s), and in my opinion that's much more important than deleting the
image from the site, especially for cases which might not be a copyright
violation and for which the copyright holder isn't yelling at us to remove
the image. That's just my opinion, though.
Anthony