[Foundation-l] Fair use being badly abused on en.wikipedia

Mon Jan 7 18:27:57 UTC 2008

"Is it fair use?" is not the relevant question for inclusion, as
Gerard pointed out very well. Our license requires that our content be
reusable for any purpose, including commercial, and fair use content
damages that goal. Therefore, the policy is that non-free content is
prohibited, except when the content is essential and no free
alternative is available and it meets US fair use requirements.

Nathan

On Jan 7, 2008 1:24 PM, Wily D <wilydoppelganger at gmail.com> wrote:
> It may be worthwhile for all involved to review fair use under
> American law  http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html - the most
> relevant point is probably "quotation of excerpts in a review or
> criticism for purposes of illustration or comment" which covers almost
> everything that's legitimate under Wikipedia's policies on what's
> allowable - obviously violations occur.
>
> Of course, I say this as a private citizen living in Canada, and as
> such someone who's essentially incapable of violating copyright laws.
> Your mileage may vary.
>
> Cheers
> WilyD
>
>
> On Jan 7, 2008 1:06 PM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > Your aim is different from the stated aim of producing a product that is
> > freely licensed and everything to its content is permitted as per the
> > license. Both the GFDL and the CC-by-sa explicitly allow for the commercial
> > application of our products. This is stated policy and when fair use is
> > incompatible with this purpose, fair use is not defendable.
> > Thanks,
> >      GerardM
> >
> >
> > On Jan 7, 2008 6:19 PM, Robert Rohde <rarohde at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Some people, myself included, want to create the best possible no-cost
> > > encyclopedia.  From that point of view, copyleft and free content is a
> > > means
> > > to that end.
> > >
> > > Other people (including much of the WMF Board apparently) feel creating
> > > free
> > > content is an end in itself that justifies sacrificing some encyclopedic
> > > coverage and limiting our exercise of fair use rights to a much narrower
> > > set
> > > of circumstances than allowed by law.
> > >
> > > I can understand that point of view, even though I don't agree with it.
> > >
> > >
> > > However, I do think we need a different set of language here.  Despite the
> > > title of this thread, there is a NOT an abuse of fair use here.  The
> > > situation being described is exactly the kind of situation for which fair
> > > use rights were created, e.g. identifying subjects of academic discussion
> > > in
> > > a non-commercial, non-competitve setting.
> > >
> > > It is, arguably, an abuse of non-free content under Wikipedia/Wikimedia
> > > policy, but abusing non-free content with respect to Wikipedia is very
> > > different than abusing fair use.
> > >
> > > That said, policy is the creation of Wikipedians/Wikimedians.  It evolves
> > > with time and often has fuzzy edges.  It's limits are, more or less,
> > > whatever it is that we agree to enforce.  Appeals to absolutes like "if
> > > you
> > > truly care about free content, we must limit fair use usage" is not very
> > > helpful, since we already do limit fair use quite substantially, both in
> > > policy and in practice.
> > >
> > > -Robert A. Rohde
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jan 7, 2008 8:01 AM, Brian Hammer <hammersoft123 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The mission of Wikimedia is to generate "neutral educational content
> > > under
> > > > a
> > > > free content license". The Foundation's resolution from March 2007
> > > states
> > > > that EDP use must be minimal, within narrow limits.
> > > >
> > > > Subsequent to the resolution being passed, a number of efforts were
> > > > undertaken to limit fair use usage on en.wikipedia. This affected
> > > > discographies, episode lists, and character lists. A *huge* number of
> > > > debates erupted over these removals. One such debate was covered at
> > > >
> > > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2007-05-07/Fair_use
> > > > .
> > > > The disputes have never ended. For discographies and episode lists,
> > > > the
> > > > debate has simmered down for the most part, with occasional flare ups.
> > > For
> > > > character lists, the debate is still raging.
> > > >
> > > > What has been the rule of thumb in removing the images is that an image
> > > of
> > > > the character being used for depiction of that character only is
> > > allowable
> > > > on that character's particular article, but not on articles collecting
> > > > multiple characters into a single article. The rationale here is that if
> > > a
> > > > character is notable enough for an article, they're notable enough for
> > > an
> > > > image, and vice versa. Allowances have been made for "cast" type images
> > > > showing multiple characters in a single image from the copyright holder
> > > > (not
> > > > montages made by editors).
> > > >
> > > > Nevertheless, the debate has raged endlessly, and has recently exploded.
> > > > It
> > > > stands now on a precipice, and it is highly likely that fair use
> > > > inclusionists will 'win' in that per-character images are going to be
> > > > permitted on character articles (for example, see
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogwarts_students ).
> > > >
> > > > Some discussion exists currently at
> > > >
> > > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Fair_use_war_being_lost
> > > > and scattered through a variety of sections of
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content
> > > >
> > > > If Wikipedia is truly a free content encyclopedia, if you truly care
> > > about
> > > > free content, we must limit fair use usage per the Foundation's
> > > > resolution.
> > > > As it stands now, this debate is lost in favor of people who are more
> > > > focused on whether something is suitable as a guide than focused on
> > > being
> > > > a
> > > > free content resource.
> > > >
> > > > A strong voice from the Foundation would be appreciated, most especially
> > > > in
> > > > favor of a new section added to clarify the local EDP at the second
> > > > paragraph of this version of the guideline:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Non-free_content&oldid=182482742#Unacceptable_images
> > > > (paragraph since removed in an edit war)
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > > Hammersoft
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>