Andre Engels wrote:
Then we'd better start deleting - there's
about 50 pictures on WikipediaEN
that are only free for non-commercial use.
Well, we'd better start flagging them, at least, which is what this
option is going to do.
There's no question that
Wikipedia.org, the website, can use such
images. It's likely that in at least some cases, for-profit websites
using our data would also be able to use such images, under fair use
which MIGHT apply IN SOME USES regardless of the desires of the
copyright holder to restrict 'commercial' uses.
Images which aren't GNU FDL or public domain are controversial on
Wikipedia. I think the things that everyone agrees on are:
1. Whenever a "fair use" image can be replaced with a GNU FDL or
public domain image, we should do so as soon as we can.
2. While it is likely legal for us to *use* some images under the
doctrine of fair use, it is a complicated doctrine and caselaw
provides only minimal guidance.
3. In any event, if we distribute licenses under "fair use", this
does not imply in any way that *other people's uses* will qualify
similarly. This makes distributing them problematic and non-free.
4. Whatever we ultimately end up doing about fair use images, one
thing is sure: we need to keep track of them better for our own
purposes, but also so that we can appropriately assist people who are
re-using the content.
------------------------------
Sometimes people say things that amount to "heh heh, this is great,
we can use the images, but some commercial outfits can't, and so if
they want to make money off of our hard work, they'll have to spend
a lot of money going through the image data figuring out what it is,
which will tend to prevent them from doing it."
I don't think that attitude is consistent with the ideal of freedom
expressed in the GNU philosophy.
--Jimbo