I agree with Garrett entirely. Even if we do continue to allow fair use, we should certainly put on some restrictions, especially considering the legal issues that fair use bring. Fair use media certainly may be helpful to textbook writers such as ourselves, but it does nothing but create unnecessary complications among textbook printers and readers (who are the majority of our wikibooks audience).
A fair use image should never be used when an acceptable copyleft or PD image is available, or when an acceptable image can be created and released under such a license.
--Andrew Whitworth
From: Garrett masterthiefster@gmail.com Reply-To: Wikimedia textbook discussion textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org To: "Wikimedia textbook discussion" textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] Textbook-l Digest, Vol 33, Issue 8 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 08:45:38 +1300
Regardless of the strictness of the upcoming official statement from the Foundation, I think our local fair use policy should stipulate that fair use should only be used when absolutely necessary AND when no PD/copyleft equivalent exists. Images with stipulations that restrict re-use should also be disallowed. If someone is creating an image specifically for a Wikibook it should be released under the GFDL to ensure the maximum compatibility.
I don't think we should go all the way and insist on Commons only, as this would make many history books difficult to write--it's unlikely some dead German general is going to claim copyright over a photograph of himself, but if Commons was the only way such images would be impossible.
The goal is to find a happy medium, and watch non-free uses closely. Other sites have had trouble with people tagging fair use images as PD or GFDL-self, so we'll need to watch for that too. I don't think this is an impossible goal, however.
--Garrett (I almost signed with ~~~~)
On 17/02/07, Iamunknown iamunknown@gmail.com wrote:
What I consider terrifying is the fact that the statute of limitations for copyright infringement in the United States is very ambiguous: technically, it is only three years, but there are numerous contradictory cases.
Consider this example. I publish a book in August 2005. Another person copies an entire chapter in December 2005 without permission and for profit, directly infringing upon my exclusive right to the material, including it in their book. Their book is published September 2006. A second edition is published September 2007. It is still on the market for several years to come. Courts might consider the December 2005 copy the original date of infringement, others might consider the September 2006, the 2007, or even the later dates when the book is still being published. Furthermore, there is ambiguity as to whether one can sue for damages only based on the past three years, or on the entire time the infringement (in this case) was in print.
I know that it is pure speculation and copyright paranoia, but it is frightening. Also, I want to say that even if we decide what we would like to limit (or outright ban) regarding fair use, we should: (1) wait for the official statement from the board and (2) get help from foundation-l or more qualified legal personnel. But I would certainly support discussion about what we would like to allow or disallow. Also, I think we should seriously consider cleaning out our fair use archives...I can testify from roving through the subcategories of [[:Category:Wikibooks images]] that we have a lot of things that should never be considered fair use.
-Iamunknown
On 2/16/07, Andrew Whitworth wknight8111@hotmail.com wrote:
It's more then just our legal risk in keeping those images and text.
Under
US copyright law, we should be legally allowed to use some copyrighted material under fair use guidelines without causing any problems. There
are
several problems with fair use:
- Fair Use only applies in the US and a small handful of other
countries.
In countries where fair use is not legal, all instances of it are
considered
copyright infringement. In these countries, it is not legal to print
or
distribute wikibooks containing fair use media. 2) Fair use, or other limited licensing (such as "the author allows
this
image to be used on wikibooks only") reduces our ability to print, distribute, and modify our texts. Derivative works, a cornerstone of
the
GFDL are not compatable with fair use, and using two incompatable
licenses
on a single aggregate project (such as a wikibook) is simply not
possible.
- Many people assume that text or an image can be released under fair
use
when it can't be. Images that are uploaded under "fair use" are
usually
(as
you pointed out) not properly tagged or referenced. These instances of misuse do constitute copyright infringement, and that could bring
lawsuits.
We allowed fair use for a pretty long time on our project, but it
isn't
the
kind of fight that we should be pursuing any longer. There are too
many
problems with it. -
--Andrew Whitworth (Whiteknight)
From: "Matthew Benedict" mattb112885@gmail.com Reply-To: Wikimedia textbook discussion
<textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To: textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] Textbook-l Digest, Vol 33, Issue 8 Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:07:29 -0500
Now that I have thought some more about it, I do feel that the use of fair use images should be limited, but the problem is where do we
draw
the line? We'd have to ask ourselves if the value of using the images in the book outweighs the legal risk of listing it under fair use, especially if the books will eventually be published in some manner, as I presume is one eventual goal for any book on the project. I
think
that only in extreme cases (such as maybe those european history images) should fair use be presumed, and these cases should be
clearly
defined, perhaps on a case-by-case or strict categorical basis.
As for textual quotations, I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that the presumption of fair use for these (provided they are properly cited
of
course) is more common than the presumption of fair use for images.
If
we're going to do that we'll need some kind of standard method to describe the rationale for the fair use argument, like wikipedia has for images (i.e. this is a screenshot used only for illustration,
this
is a low-res company logo used to show what it looks like, etc).
Speaking of citation, one problem with current fair use images is
that
a lot of them don't really cite the source properly; i.e. who created it? From what source was it derived? This information should be in
the
image page, but often they just have descriptions of what the image is, not where it came from or who the current copyright holder is, which can cause problems of its own.
Regards,
Mattb112885
On 2/16/07, textbook-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org textbook-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Send Textbook-l mailing list submissions to textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to textbook-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at textbook-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
specific
than "Re: Contents of Textbook-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
- Regarding fair use (Iamunknown)
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Iamunknown iamunknown@gmail.com To: textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:52:49 -0700 Subject: [Textbook-l] Regarding fair use I really don't want fair use to go totally away, but I agree that
it
should
be significantly limited. The clause, "Because of our commitment
to
free
content, this non-free media should not be used when it is
reasonably
possible to replace with free media that would serve the same
educational
purpose," in Kat Walsh's statement comes to mind. While I have
expreseed
concern on-wiki and on-mailing list before about unlicensed
images,
many
which, if licensed properly, would remained unlicensed and used
under
fair
use, I think that we should not outright ban unlicensed content
used
under
fair use. In particular, we should allow very very limited use of
non-free
media when it would be practically impossible to use free media --
the
media
used in the European History wikibook comes to mind -- and for
small
textual
quotations. What are everyone else's feelings?
-Iamunknown
--===============8126416904983688626==-- _______________________________________________ Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and moreĀ .then map the best
route!
http://maps.live.com/?icid=hmtag1&FORM=MGAC01
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
_________________________________________________________________ Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - Refinance $150,000 loan for $579 a month. Intro*Terms http://www.NexTag.com