[Foundation-l] RfC: Draft licensing policy resolution

Peter van Londen londenp at gmail.com
Thu Feb 22 15:27:13 UTC 2007

2007/2/22, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen op gmail.com>:
> Hoi,
> When material is used with a "Fair Use" argumentation, the license that
> this material would otherwise be available under is irrelevant. The
> material could even have a commercial license. The claim of Fair Use
> trumps any license restriction. When someone wants to re-publish
> Wikipedia, the same claim of Fair Use should apply. This is why it has
> to conform to the laws of the US and the local law(s).

You are probably right for republishing, but I don't believe that this is
true for making derivative works of Wikipedia. The GFDL-licence of
wikipedia, allows to change the material. Well with a fair use image, when
it is copyrighted (and not free-licensed), you would not be able to change
the material, so therefore the fair use image is not compatible to the GFDL
of Wikimedia-projects. Geniice told me on IRC, if I understand correctly,
that you might change a copyrighted image (fair use or not) if it is a very
small part of the original, like for a parody (under USA-law). But album
covers are not part of this.

It is therefore really simple. On its own ND and NC will not be
> permitted. Within the limits of the law, there may be an EDP.

So in fact you wouldn't need an EDP at all in my opinion.

>     GerardM

 Thanks as well

More information about the foundation-l mailing list