[WikiEN-l] Application of the {{pd-art}} tag

[Matt Brown]

On 4/11/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Bridgeman v. Corel was a district court case, never litigated at the
> appeals court level, and therefore is not a strong precedent.  It is, as
> far as I have been able to determine, a fairly unusual result not likely
> to be followed by other courts.

I wouldn't go that far, personally.  In fact, my reading of why it was
never litigated at the appeals court level is that Bridgeman and
others feared setting a better precedent thereby, and one not in their
interest.

I believe fear of an adverse precedent is exactly why there have been
few cases to cite post-Bridgeman, as well.

Within the sensible reading of the law as it stands, Bridgeman v.
Corel reached the correct verdict; /however/, as we all know, the law
is not sensible and courts frequently side with the vested interests
in copyright cases.

I truly doubt anyone would try to use Wikipedia in a precedent-setting
test case - we're a sympathetic defendent.  Corel, as a commercial
company making money from their alleged copyright infringement, was a
better test case, and they lost.

However, we should certainly keep track of any image we use under the
assumptions of Bridgeman v. Corel, so that if the law or precedent
changes we can re-evaluate them.

Note that none of this applies if you scan or photograph the image
yourself, or if it is licensed under a Wikipedia-compatible license by
someone who did.

-Matt