In 6/22/06, Fastfission fastfission@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/22/06, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
Yes, transformative use has long been a feature of fair use in the US. However, it's not a feature of fair use/dealing under English common law or the Berne Convention. Unless there is some amount of harmonisation, US law will remain largely irrelevant for Wikipedia. As I've repeatedly argued, Wikipedia should be freely redistributable throughout the world, not just in the US.
Right, guys, but that's another discussion entirely, and one which we've had before and one which hasn't changed much since the last time we talked about it.
Yes, and during that other discussion I believe most people agreed that just because something is *legal* to use in Wikipedia that doesn't mean it is appropriate to use.
Noncommercial-only and by-permission images are also both legal to use in Wikipedia. But they are still not allowed.
The question isn't whether or not the image is legal, the question is whether or not the image is free.
Anthony