On 12/4/06, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Fair use generally only applies if you are using the copyrighted material in an article about the material itself.
That's a very specific example of fair use which Wikipedia generally dictates as the only one it's willing to accept. I believe that lots of other uses can be "fair use". For example, it's generally acceptable for an academic to photocopy bits out of a journal so that they can study it at home, if the journal can't be borrowed - no violation of copyright takes place. I believe this would be in the same category. We would not be copying the material to avoid someone having to buy the book, we'd be copying it to enable readers to simply check that it says what someone is claiming it does. Perfectly fair, IMHO.
Using it as a source isn't "fair".
Don't get you.
Most dead-tree sources can be found a good library, which should be
enough to verify it if we need to.
Know anyone who has ever gone to a library to verify a Wikipedia citation? Ever had a suspicion about a dead-tree citation? Could you be bothered going to a library to check it out? Could you be bothered to click on a link?
Steve