Gregory Maxwell stated for the record:
I propose we establish a policy that PD confirmation must be sought for all images obtained from US government websites.
Only material actually produced by US federal government employees in the course of their work is automatically PD. Often government websites also contain commercial stock photography and other contract works which we have no right to use. US Federal government websites are among the most responsive on the internet, so obtaining such permission should not be an issue.
There is usually an opportunity to apply common sense: If it looks like stock photography it probably is, and we should ask. Very few government agencies actually produce their own publication grade images. However, there are a number of well meaning wikipedians who have very wishful ideas of what we can use... If we ask them to apply common sense we get Alanis Morrissette's Ironic uploaded.
As long as copyright warriors are willing to apply common sense the other way -- it is patently obvious that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ssn22vBear1.jpg and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ssn22vBear2.jpg were taken by a Naval officer during the performance of his duty, and I would have little patience if someone were to argue that they ''might'' not be.
I've spent a lot of time thinking about this, and I think the best course of action would be for use to make a strong statement that we *always* prefer works made by wikimedia project participants. If we must choose between a work with free licensing and one made by a wikipedian we should always replace the free work with the wikipedians work unless the outside work is clearly better. If there is any possible doubt in the copyright the work should be replaced by a work from one of our users. We should avoid making outside works featured images.
I find the standard "any possible doubt" to be much too paranoid. The standard for convicting someone of premeditated murder is lower than that. If we held ourselves to that standard, we would be an image-free Web site -- ''no'' image's provenance is ''utterly impossible'' for someone to doubt.
The wikimedia projects already have a sizable and growing base of photographers, illustrators, and musicians. It is completely reasonable to believe that we can meet our own media needs, excluding specific historical works that we wish to comment on.
Are you actually saying that it is "completely reasonable" for a Wikipedian to photograph the wreck of USS ''Thresher''? For a Wikipedian to take a clear picture of a B-2 Spirit in flight? For a Wikipedian to take snapshots of the construction of the International Space Station? There are several myriad subjects beyond "specific historical works that we wish to comment on" for which the public domain is the only source of images.
-- Sean Barrett | When I become evil overlord, if I'm sean@epoptic.com | looking all around for my elusive enemy, | I will occasionally look up as well.