Haukur Þorgeirsson wrote:
This argument is getting a bit tired. Do you have an [[IBM 360]] in your backyard?
Someone appparently does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:IBM360-65-1.corestore.jpg
GNU FDL.
So you see, giving up too easily is a bad idea.
It is a simple matter for downstream users not to include images tagged used-with-permission. Wikipedia articles very rarely rely on the images in their main text.
Yes, but the point is: if we have a non-free image, it "scratches the itch" and reduces the incentive for someone to be heroic and find a way to get us a free image. So if we have tons of non-free or fair-use images that people can't reuse, we have a nicer website, but we make the resource less nice for people who want to reuse it.
And, sadly, it seems that Jimbo's fatwah against UWP has increased the number of far-fetched rationalizations for fair use on Wikipedia.
I consider this quite unfortunate. I think that our use of fair-use should be restricted solely to pictures of absolute historical importance for which there is no possibility of a free alternative. But this is not a decree because this is an ongoing process of evolution at this point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Fair_use_images
A quick scan of these reveals a number of highly dubious images which we could either (a) do without or (b) replace with a freely licensed alternative easily enough.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:1987_Cadillac_Seville.JPG
I should imagine that if we desperately need a boring photo of a 1987 Cadillac Seville, one can be located on the streets easily enough.
--Jimbo