John Lee wrote:
Redvers @ the Wikipedia wrote:
In the area I edit in most (British television history), many of the subjects have a long visual history of changing logos and graphic design. This is usually reflected in the illustrations in the articles.
Fair use galleries are verboten unless each image in the gallery has its subject discussed by the article. I quote from the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. ยง 107: "...the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as /criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research/, is not an infringement of copyright." If the gallery fulfills these requirements (the images and article content must be considered together), then the fair use is permissible. This hardly ever happens, however. And as with most copyright issues...better safe than sorry.
We're talking about galleries of historical company logos in an article about the company. I'd say such use should count as "comment", and probably as "teaching, scholarship or research".
But I suppose the real issue is not how either of us interprets those words, but how they've been interpreted in court. Any real lawyers here who'd care to comment?