-----Original Message----- From: WikipediaEditor Durin [mailto:wikidurin@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 08:24 AM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: [WikiEN-l] Fair use redux; the second coming of hell; Are we a free content or aren't we?
If the people are on this mailing list are unable to make decisions on this, who should I take this matter to? I'm of the understanding that Jimbo wanted this list to be the main source of business work, so to speak. Yet, the support I've seen regarding fair use issues brought up in an earlier thread is weak at best. Is there another place I should be taking this?
-Durin
Yes, there probably is. Our public mailing lists are becoming progressively less useful. Only a few participate and of those few only a small fraction have actual gravitas in terms of the working of Wikipedia. Since you're talking about images, perhaps the Commons community is where this issue should be fully considered and something done.
To address the issue, I fear we are accepting fair use for trivial purposes. Great public issues are one thing, a fair use image of an entertainer is quite another. A fair use image should be vital for understanding of a significant issue.
Fred
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:43:33 +0000, "Fred Bauder" fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
To address the issue, I fear we are accepting fair use for trivial purposes. Great public issues are one thing, a fair use image of an entertainer is quite another. A fair use image should be vital for understanding of a significant issue.
Please pitch in to the debate on fair use for album covers, which are to a very good first approximation 100% decorative.
Guy (JzG)
On 7/19/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:43:33 +0000, "Fred Bauder" fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
To address the issue, I fear we are accepting fair use for trivial purposes. Great public issues are one thing, a fair use image of an entertainer is quite another. A fair use image should be vital for understanding of a significant issue.
Please pitch in to the debate on fair use for album covers, which are to a very good first approximation 100% decorative.
Egads. Guy!
Frilly borders around a page, like we see on userpages sometimes, are decorative.
The "image of an album for identification purposes" is informative, and helps people understand and remember the information in the article visually. It forms a memory connecting the content with the picture, which will help them remember if they see the album in real life, etc.
Paper encyclopedias don't only include images of stuff where the images illustrate salient specific features of a bird or a landmark, with detailed caption showing how the rock erosion or wing feather patterns are important. They illustrate things so that you know what they look like, and because the illustrated entries are remembered better.
Images are good.
Fred Bauder wrote:
From: WikipediaEditor Durin [mailto:wikidurin@gmail.com]
If the people are on this mailing list are unable to make decisions on this, who should I take this matter to? I'm of the understanding that Jimbo wanted this list to be the main source of business work, so to speak. Yet, the support I've seen regarding fair use issues brought up in an earlier thread is weak at best. Is there another place I should be taking this?
Yes, there probably is. Our public mailing lists are becoming progressively less useful. Only a few participate and of those few only a small fraction have actual gravitas in terms of the working of Wikipedia. Since you're talking about images, perhaps the Commons community is where this issue should be fully considered and something done.
To address the issue, I fear we are accepting fair use for trivial purposes. Great public issues are one thing, a fair use image of an entertainer is quite another. A fair use image should be vital for understanding of a significant issue.
One needs to remember that anything published in the US before 1989 had to include a copyright notice. If publicity shots of stars were being sent to fans without copyright notices all that would be in the public domain.
Ec