...

I would be fine with such a policy. And I argue that if we can tolerate a few fair-use images where they are the only ones available we can also tolerate a few used-with-permission images where those are the only ones we can obtain.

If they truly are the only ones we can obtain, then they're almost certainly fair use for us anyway.

That is by no means certain, even under U.S. law. And I don't understand why it would be better to rely on fair-use than on a permission.

The permission should be noted, but isn't critical.

If we continue to forbid used-with-permission images then people aren't going to bother to get the permission to begin with.

But there's a huge difference between an image being the only one of its kind we can get under any circumstances, and being the only image some editor is able to get a hold of.

In the past, even with Wikipedia-only permissions discouraged, far too many users have thought it sufficient just to ask for permission without asking for permission under a free license. Allowing this would encourage people to be even more lazy about getting free images.

I profoundly disagree. Anyone going to the trouble of asking for permission to use an image *is not being lazy*. The lazy thing to do is to slap a fair-use tag on the image and don't bother about trying to get permission This is precisely what the current policy encourages.

Regards, Haukur