Phil Boswell wrote:
"Timwi" timwi@gmx.net wrote in message news:d7ajq0$887$1@sea.gmane.org...
Quite to the contrary, you only asked if the image could be used on Wikipedia, not whether they would license it under the GFDL or anything else. Therefore, they only agreed to using it on Wikipedia, and therefore it should not be used on Wikipedia because it isn't free.
Am I the only person stunned by the complete lack of logical progression here?
A) The owners of the image agreed for it to be used on Wikipedia B) Therefore it can't be.
Suppose I write an article and then allow you to "use it" on Wikipedia under the restriction that you may not make any modifications to it. It is hopefully clear to you now that the text cannot be used in Wikipedia, even though I gave permission to "use it".
It is only your summarisation that reduces it to the point where it seems contradictory (but isn't actually). Just because someone agreed for something to be used on Wikipedia, does not necessarily mean that it can be (or should be) used on Wikipedia. In a way, by saying that it is contradictory, you're only stating that you don't understand it.
Timwi