Waiting for the official resolution, I still do not understand why an image under fair use should be used in en.wiki (and probably only in en.wiki) and an image with permission and non-commercial should not be used on a project where the fair use is "de facto" illegal. Assuming that both images with permission and fair use images have to be limited *only* for uses that request necessarily an image and when no free images are available. I do not think that even a strong fair use image may be re-used for commercial purposes. Moreover considering that images with permission are checked to assure that they are used only for allowed case (through OTRS), and fair use images are not.
piero tasso http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:P_tasso
On 08/02/07, Piero pierogra@libero.it wrote:
Moreover considering that images with permission are checked to assure that they are used only for allowed case (through OTRS), and fair use images are not.
No, that is not how OTRS permissions work. OTRS checks that the copyright-holder has released the media under a free license, not that limited-permission media are being used in those limited ways. 'Images with permission', if you mean Wikipedia-only permission images, would these days be told 'sorry, that's not free enough'.
I thin IT.wp just needs to accept this announcement. Wailing about it is not going to make any progress. (And no I'm not a fair use apologist. I think we should abolish all fair use, too...)
regards, Brianna user:pfctdayelise
Brianna Laugher ha scritto:
On 08/02/07, Piero pierogra@libero.it wrote:
Moreover considering that images with permission are checked to assure that they are used only for allowed case (through OTRS), and fair use images are not.
No, that is not how OTRS permissions work. OTRS checks that the copyright-holder has released the media under a free license, not that limited-permission media are being used in those limited ways. 'Images with permission', if you mean Wikipedia-only permission images, would these days be told 'sorry, that's not free enough'.
I thin IT.wp just needs to accept this announcement. Wailing about it is not going to make any progress. (And no I'm not a fair use apologist. I think we should abolish all fair use, too...)
regards, Brianna user:pfctdayelise
I say that for "images with permission" is possible to have a sort of control, for "fair use images" it's not possible; I do not think we need absolutely images with permission, we can choose to cut them off, which is probably the best solution; but I think that an image with permission is more fair than a "fair use" one.
piero tasso
Piero wrote:
Waiting for the official resolution, I still do not understand why an image under fair use should be used in en.wiki (and probably only in en.wiki) and an image with permission and non-commercial should not be used on a project where the fair use is "de facto" illegal. Assuming that both images with permission and fair use images have to be limited *only* for uses that request necessarily an image and when no free images are available. I do not think that even a strong fair use image may be re-used for commercial purposes. Moreover considering that images with permission are checked to assure that they are used only for allowed case (through OTRS), and fair use images are not.
As long as you keep trying to conflate fair use and the different varieties of licence it is inevitable that you will not understand.
"Fair use" is a right that derives from law.
A "licence" is a right granted by one person to an other.
Neither needs to depend on the other. In any given circumstances either or both may apply without regard to whether the other applies.
WMF may choose to apply a restricted version of either.
Something is "legal" if it is not specifically prohibited. Failure to mention something in the law does not imply that it is "illegal". There is a subtle but important difference between the terms "illegal" and "not legal".
Ec
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org