On 5/18/06, Rob Church <robchur(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm not an expert, but I believe that since we'd still be making the
image available (via the image page, etc.) then we'd have a potential
legal battle later. Check with Brad on that one, though.
Yep, it's tricky. It seems to me that if a fair use case could possibly ever
be made for an image that there would be some legitimacy in storing it in
such a form (low res etc). Take the case of a map of some suburb. It's
theoretically possibly that we would one day have an article about the
construction of that map, for which we would be entitled to have a low res
copy.
I think I should learn more about 'fair use' - it could be quite
interesting. I've wondered, for example, whether it's legitimate to use the
cover of an autobiography (incorporating the subject's face) as the main
image of an article about the person, when the book itself is discussed in
passing in the text. And lots of other borderline cases where the image
serves two purposes simultaneously - one if which is criticism or
identification of the object, and one of which is illustration of what the
object itself illustrates.
Steve