[Foundation-l] a new free image!

[teun spaans]

Gerard,

May I kindly remind you how this thread started.

This thread started with a beautiful story of how the lack of a photo
prompted a professional photographer to donate photos. Personally I think
this would never happened if there had been an image under the fair use
provision. The lack of a picture makes people run, if there is a picture no
one gets out of his chair to say: He, there is a match tonight, I'm gonna
take some pix.

I know many fair use advocates think the opposite. On this list I read "the
availability of a fair use image won't stop
someone from adding a free alternative" and "We should also recall that the
readers, would like to see an image until there "

When we spoke with each other in the past you never supported the usage of
"fair use". Somehow your statements on this list, when I read them, even
where they seem to say the opposite, seem to suggest that you have changed
your point of view.
For example, when Muhammed suggests "the availability of a fair use image
won't stop someone from adding a free alternative", I think: he's right it
is not forbidden to add a free picture. But no longer any one will stand up
and say: it is a shame that we dont have a photo, There is a mact / concert
/ interview tonight, I am going there and snap some pix! So effectually,
having a fair use image does hurt the collecting of free content. Then you
come and suggest that there is no need to cripple images for fair use (an
doubtful statement, see below). Even when you add "If anything we should not
have "Fair use" material.", your previous statement seems to support
Muhammeds plead for fair use.

You suggest that it is not necessary to crop high quality images for fair
use. The assumption that cropping images improves legal chances for fair use
application is however very widespread. It also was one of the factors in
Kelly v. Arriba-Soft, 03 C.D.O.S. 5888 (9th Cir. 2003).

The defenders of fair use should realize that we talk about a rather vast
amount of images.
Some numbers:
Template:albumcovers:     >55.000
Template:film-screenshot: >15.000
Template:Tv-screenshot:  > 30.000
Now these images will be hard to replace, but I really wonder how many
attempts have been made to make them free.
Others, such as those of famous people, and many of the 15.000 pics in
"template:fair use in" fall in this category, could potentially be replaced
by free pictures is someone simply steps out of his chair and starts taking
pictures.

Gerad, I think you did not understand what I wrote about NC and ND. The
current draft as I read it, places little restrictions on exemptions. This
may lead to all kinds of unintended exemptions.

I know that in your heart, Gerard, you support the creation of free content.


I wish you health and happiness,
teun spaans



On 2/24/07, GerardM < gerard.meijssen at gmail.com > wrote:
>
> Teun.
> May I kindly remind you that we are discussing on this list how to deal
> with
> all types of issues. Personally I have never ever uploaded "Fair use"
> material. It is however done on some of our projects. When material is
> used
> with a justification of being "Fair use", there is imho no reason to
> cripple
> such material. This was suggested in the previous post.
>
> You were wrong in how you reacted to what I wrote about NC and ND the
> other
> day, you again assume things that are not in line with what I wrote. It is
>
> good to remember that "Fair use" is permitted to a project under a
> Exemption
> Doctrine Policy if they so choose. It is therefore relevant to discuss how
> this is to be implemented if at all. This is what I did.
>
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
>
> On 2/24/07, teun spaans <teun.spaans at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Gerard,
> >
> > may I kindly remind you that our aim is to make and collect free
> content?
> > Fair use is not free.
> >
> > And your remark about crippling content looks false: i checked a few of
> > the
> > old versions, and these didnt have a photograph. Not even a fair use
> one.
> >
> > regards,
> > teun spaans
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2/24/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hoi,
> > > When you have a good quality picture that you want to use under Fair
> > use,
> > > you use it as a good quality picture. Why cripple our content when
> there
> > > is
> > > no need ? If anything we should not have "Fair use" material.
> > > Thanks,
> > >      GerardM
> > >
> > > On 2/24/07, Mohamed Magdy <mohamed.m.k at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > > Well, good work!..but as others said, this isn't the proper way to
> get
> > > > rid of fair use images..the availability of a fair use image won't
> > stop
> > > > someone from adding a free alternative, fair use images shouldn't be
> > > > added in a high resolution..right? so when someone sees the image
> with
> > > > low quality and s/he has another free one, s/he will replace it with
> > the
> > > > free image, provided that you place a message on free use images
> > saying
> > > > 'this image isn't free, if you can help.replace it...'...on the
> other
> > > > end, I think with the increasing popularity, people will just add
> > their
> > > > images(to say: hey, i took that image you see on [[Cat]]
> article!)...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>