Hoi,
You can take more pictures of the same subject, you cannot have a bon mot
repeated in a same way. If that is not obvious, what is..
Thanks,
GerardM
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:48 AM, Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 5:58 PM, mike.lifeguard
<mike.lifeguard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I
personally cannot imagine an US court accepting these number
as "fair use" and I cannot see any educational use of these quotations
legitimating an exception from our policy.
I'm afraid I don't understand how we reconcile the principle that WMF is
supposed to provide freely-licensed content, and the Wikiquote project is
apparently chock-full of so-called fair use. This is far worse than
simply
incorporating fair use media (which is not
permitted on many projects for
principled reasons). I can understand a Wikiquote containing quotes which
have fallen out of copyright and I think such a project would be
wonderful.
But using fair use to compile quotes seems to me
to be a bad idea
regardless
of how many there are. So whether a court would
accept a fair use defence
is
rather immaterial to me - I am more concerned
with the principle of
having
an entire article/page of solely fair use
content. For a WMF project,
this
seems nonsensical.
Mike
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Exactly. While there is certainly merit in collecting free quotes
(mostly from the public domain), it makes no sense that such
blanket fair use would be seen as acceptable to the core mission
of providing _free_ content.
We have a policy to limit fair use media, why not one for text?
-Chad
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l