Steve Bennett wrote:
I think what is meant is that the O RLY owl (O RLY
stamped over a picture of
an owl taken by someone else) infringed on the copyright of the original owl
photographer. And since we weren't doing anything fair-use-wise with respect
to that original photo, we were infringing on their copyright as well.
Which seems logical - otherwise there would be a massive loophole. We could
write O RLY on a non-free map of France, and use it in the France article to
discuss O RLY or whatever...
Better still in an article on Orly Airport. :-)