2007/1/28, Jeffrey V. Merkey
<jmerkey(a)wolfmountaingroup.com>om>:
All it takes is one lawsuit from someone who is
upset at the images
being used, and the money from
the last fund drive could get used up in legal fees pretty durn fast. If
someone object to images
being used, then TAKE THEM OFF THE SITE, Fair use argments are not. I
recall my interactions
on en.wikipedia with people using copyrighted materials and some of the
debates I had there.
Bottom line, these anonymus editors are not the people who will get
nailed. The foundation will
be the ones who get served and Brad will have to hire a law firm to
defend the Foundation. It's
pretty simple -- if someone who owns th images does not want them used,
then do not use them.
But what if there is no such request? Should we keep everything on the site
until we get a request to take it down? Or should we only put things on that
are as free as our own texts? Or something somewhere in between? That's what
the issue is about.
Doctrine of Esstoppel. Someone puts something up fair use and the owner
does not complain, then
should be no big deal (though the law says they have to have gotten some
sort of notice or discovered
its use before the statute of limitation time clock starts ticking).
If someone goes to the trouble of sending a notice to take it down, then
it should be addressed, apart from
what yould be obvious misuse of someone else's materials.
Jeff