On 9/25/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Particularly as images of living people are almost always RIDICULOUSLY replaceable. Apart from extreme cases like J.D. Salinger, there's pretty much no excuse for a non-free image on a living bio.
In fact.. in this thread we've seen images so replaceable that we already had free images on commons.... But that didn't stop people from arguing that we were sacrificing the encyclopedia on the alter of freedom.
What do we have such an obsession with immediacy in the case of images? ... Other than a in few cases involving special users I don't recall any history of complaints that we were destroying the encyclopedia because we preferred the slow path of writing new freely licensed articles rather than just illicitly copying whatever we could get away with.