On 3/24/06, KWH k.w.harris@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/23/06, "Matt Brown" morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/23/06, jkelly@fas.harvard.edu jkelly@fas.harvard.edu wrote:
I think that this is largely true. My suggestion was meant to be more conservative, in that it would only expedite deletion of media where we are saying "This is fair use", and it is being used in an article, but we have no rationale whatsoever.
Fair enough. Is it required that the original uploader provide the fair use rationale, or can someone else? If we require the original uploader, that might be a problem. If you're not the original uploader, but provide a rationale, are you thereby assuming responsibility for a copyright lawsuit?
-Matt
I've done a bit of thinking on this, and I believe that whoever includes the image tag in the article would be responsible for preparing a work containing the fair use material. If User A uploads the image, B puts it in the article, and then C breezes by and puts a fair use justification, then B would probably be responsible; but if D comes by and corrects a typo in the article and leaves the image tag in, then D could become responsible.
But this is all hopelessly speculative. My opinion is that the purpose that the source, tag, and fair use justification serve is allowing downstream consumers of the image database (future editors and also those who download the wikipedia database to build fork sites) to make a solid determination of whether they want to include the image in their work. It's a form of "rights clearance" database.
Legal arguments about the fair use rationale are hopeless. Any lawyer qualified to give advice on the matter would not give it for free on the Internet without that famous disclaimer, "this does not constitute legal advice, contact a licensed professional...", q.v. [[Wikipedia:Legal disclaimer]]. I think my own opinion is pretty good just as an average US citizen with an interest in the law, but I won't bore anyone with it unless upon request. Therefore the bottom line is anyone who's concerned about themselves should talk to a lawyer about their specific case.
The decision is quite simply: "if I decide to take this article and edit it, and there is an image included in the previous version, do I want to include it in my version? Do I feel comfortable with the source and fair use justification? Would I feel better if I removed or replaced it, and why?" Life's much easier when you consider it in that light.
[[User:Kwh]] _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
You can't expect someone to take responsibility for an picture someone else put in an article. Too many people know too little about copyright law or are just completely ignorant.
I think we should have some project that tags images as they come in (or throws them out) to stop this from getting out of hand and to make sure valid images aren't deleted just because the original uploader forgot to tag it. All of them should get reviewed by at least 3 people before being thrown out. Deleting something is very easy, a similar effort should be made to tag an image properly.
Mgm