Steve Summit wrote:
Todd Allen wrote:
The point isn't -only- "Will someone sue
Wikipedia over this?" or even
"Will someone sue a commercial mirror over this if they inadvertently
use it too?" It's "Unless we absolutely -must, must- have nonfree
content, we should keep nonfree content off the -free- encyclopedia."
Bearing in mind that not everybody agrees with this last principle.
And also where the "must have" line gets drawn. A lot of people feel
that articles about music albums must have a cover scan in order to be
"complete", and IMO a valid case can be made for that.
Amazon is way more commercial than most of our mirrors and they seem to
consider cover scans both important and safe to use.