Charlotte Webb wrote:
On 6/21/07, Philippe Beaudette philippebeaudette@gmail.com wrote:
As I recall (and Anthere, apologies if I've got this wrong) - the image is a member of the fr community who died recently and Anthere wanted to keep it as a memorial, if it made sense. She was obviously prepared to let it go (and did, in fact, let it go) but someone applied IAR and *poof* it's back.
Yes. I'm just saying that if the user had been required to upload his self-portrait under a free license, we would not be having the post-mortem debate about whether or not we can use the picture for memorial purposes.
In fact the policy page on the English Wikipedia is clear on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#User-created_images
The picture was not added to the English Wikipedia, so what is said there is irrelevant.
Wikipedia encourages users to upload their own images, but all user-created images must be licensed under a free license (such as the GFDL and/or an acceptable Creative Commons license) or be released into the public domain (no copyright). If licensing, it is best practice to multi-license your images under both GFDL and a Creative Commons license.
This explicitly forbids invoking a "fair use" defense with material you yourself hold the rights to, which would IMO create a legally (or at least morally) frivolous situation for everyone involved.
What he did was within the rules at the time he uploaded. Where is he claiming fair use on his own material?
Ec