On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 05:44:47AM -0700, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Marco Krohn wrote, quoting Axel Boldt:
"Illustrating an article by adding a photo creates a derivative work, therefore the whole has to be put under GFDL, therefore it cannot be fair use material (or anything besides public domain or GFDL)."
This is not valid reasoning. If accurate, then we can't even quote from copyrighted sources, not even one sentence of quotation, because all such use is done under a "fair use" doctrine.
Suppose we have an article about a book by Noam Chomsky. We wish to explain the thesis of the book, and toward that end, we quote a relevant sentence from the book. This is perfectly valid, and it is fair use.
What is the situation in German law? You seem to be arguing that there is no such thing as fair use in German law, but that strikes me as virtually impossible. Can you give the details?
By the way, I agree with those who say that (a) strictly speaking, German law is not of primary interest to us, but also with those who say that (b) if we can make sure that the encyclopedia is redistributable in Germany, too, that's a good thing, if it doesn't cost much in terms of content.
At least in Polish law, such quotation wouldn't be subject of copyright law at all. On the other hand, using somebody else's ilustrations without authorization is plain illegal (there is some procedure that allows you to use them and send them some standard fee whether they like it or not, but it doesn't apply in all cases). There are some (mostly explicitely listed, plus some general principles about others) cases where you can simply take somebody else's photos (or other stuff) and use them, but I don't think they're going to be compatible between coutries. Most of them are about non-commercial usage, so they don't apply to Wikipedia anyway.