[Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)

[Ray Saintonge]

The Cunctator wrote:

>My attitude is that Wikipedia should be pushing the copyright envelope
>(within reason, of course) on all fronts.
>
Philosophically I agree with you, but I think that WMF should not be the 
one playing this role.  As an ISP it should maintain an arm's length 
from these disputes, and respond correctly to all takedown demands.  For 
the sake of keeping itself protected WMF should avoid taking on dumb 
risks.  This does not mean that individual projects cannot take more 
aggressive stands, but the lines of responsibility must be clear.  These 
must be accepted by individuals.  If someone feels strongly that using 
the Escher drawings is fair use, he should be the one prepared to argue 
the matter in court.  The rest of us should not be kept hostage because 
of one person's idiotic misunderstanding of fair use.

Oddly enough, there is a bigger problem with people who do not protect 
their own copyrights.  By failing to say yes or no to our uses they keep 
the situation uncertain.  Even those copyvios which seem obvious are not 
questioned, as much as we may be willing to accomodate their complaints.

>All non-governmental content from the past century is covered by copyright
>(essentially).
>
Maybe the last half-century.  For the US one needs to remember that 
works published before 1964 had to be renewed, and this was only done 
for a small proportion of those works.

>We should be expanding (and we are) the amount of content covered by free
>licenses (GFDL,CC-SA).
>
Yes.  This involves not only using free, but making free.

>We should also be demonstrating the importance of challenging the absurd
>life and strength of copyright laws by taking advantage of fair use when we
>can.
>
Especially in approaching the question of orphan copyrights.  At the 
same time we should no become fixated on the idea that fair use is the 
only available tool.

>Google is a great example of a company that by dint of its popularity gets
>to run roughshod over copyright restrictions that companies would squash if
>they weren't so reliant on Google.
>
Maybe it's because they don't roll over at the first sign of danger.  
Paranoia is rarely an effective tactic.

>Similarly Wikipedia is now in the position of being one of the 800-pound
>gorillas.
>
A mere baby, and growing.

>Wikipedia has the power to shape law because of its size and influence.
>
A significant portion of the Wikimedia community has failed to grasp this.

Ec