--- Erik Moeller erik_moeller@gmx.de wrote:
Axel-
The wiki-author doesn't add a picture, he adds a reference to a picture.
....with the intent and expectation that the image and the text be combined into a whole by the user's browser.
What matters in law is the text of the FDL, because that's what we're dealing with.
Actually, what matters is the meaning of "derivative work", which is defined in copyright law. If illustrating an article with a picture creates a derivative work, GFDL applies automatically to the whole.
This is the essence of a reasonable fair use doctrine for Wikipedia: Try to figure out if someone may be interested in stopping distribution of picture X, and if so, do not include it (possibly with some rare exceptions of high political/historical significance).
That does not make good policy: Wikipedia contributors have zero incentive to do this research. They want to illustrate an article, and quick. Finding the copyright holder and sending an email to ask whether there is a functioning market for digital reproduction of this picture would be way to much hassle. Should all fair-use pictures without this proof be deleted?
and in addition may have commercial interests which weakens their fair use defense considerably.
People who want to make money with Wikipedia can be expected to do some manual work.
"The free encyclopedia", as in "freely modifiable and redistributable", not "free for non-commercial use".
Axel
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com