I took a look at the xenu article and dont see any reason for including the bbc screen shot. Likewise, the artcile remains perfectly understandable without the book covers and handwriting. Hence, there is no need to include these fair use images, and make the article undistributable in large parts of the world.
Please keep in mind that we english wiki is not the same as USA. The stuff on the english wiki should be equially well usable all over the world: UK, australia, canada, new zealand, israel, african countries, india, you name it. The need for fair use images is often greatly exaggerated.
Please keep in mind: a) our aim is to cerate an encyclopedia the knowledge of which can be freely modified and distributed b) our aim is not to illustrate articles for the sake of illustration c) our aim is not to exploit all loopholes of USA law d) our aim is not be nice to each other and thus ruin our goal e) our aim is only to built an encyclopedia in all languages of which all knowledge is truly free.
kind regards, ~~~~
On 1/17/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/01/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/17/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I'm fine with book and album covers in an article substantially dealing with the book or album or its cover specifically - that's clearly fair use. It's when e.g. it's a general illustration on an artist article that it's pushing it.
Why? If you want to view images as quotes then their use only makes sense when the article talks about the images.
No, that's an illustration of the thing actually being talked about that can't really be substituted (the way a picture of a living person can).
My favourite example is [[Xenu]]. I think the BBC and South Park screencaps could be lived without, but the book covers, Sea Org logo and snippet of Hubbard's handwriting are entirely relevant fair use in an educational article about Xenu.
- d.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l