Rory Stolzenberg wrote:
On 1/4/07, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 1/4/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
I am using common sense. I am absolutely not suggesting that we don't link to YouTube period. If the video has a valid fair use rationale on YouTube then it's not a copyright violation.
Can you give some examples of copyvios that have been linked to / should be removed?
Sure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Keep_it_to_Yourself_%28single%29&a...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Luther_Blissett_%28footballer%29&a...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Snowman_%28album%29&diff=prev&...
and many more.
One of the tests for determining whether there is contributory infringement mentined in Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/cjoyce/copyright/release10/IntRes.html, the case referenced in [[Wikipedia:Copyrights]] is whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the site hosting the material will be found in violation. In that case the hosts included a whole handbook, and there is a likelihood that that alone would fail the proportion of material used test for fair use. The fair use argument is available to YouTube's uploaders, and fair use is not a copyright infringement. It is not up to us to go through the full fair use rationale because we are not hosting the material.
Ec