[Foundation-l] Is there a good reason to delete the Burj Al Arab?

[Nathan]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Marco Chiesa <chiesa.marco at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> When I said "can" I was talking from a legal perspective. The law is
>> the same regardless of what language the content is in.
>>
>
> This is not correct, please read
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy
>
> Quoting:
> Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP)
>    A project-specific policy, in accordance with United States law
> and the law of countries where the project content is predominantly
> accessed (if any), that recognizes the limitations of copyright law
> (including case law) as applicable to the project, and permits the
> upload of copyrighted materials that can be legally used in the
> context of the project, regardless of their licensing status. Examples
> include: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content and
> http://pl.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Dozwolony_u%C5%BCytek.
>
> Cruccone
>

I think this is a complicated subject, but it seems to be generally
accurate to say that fair use for the Wikimedia Foundation is the same
regardless of the language, in the United States (where the
corporation is registered).

Of course that doesn't mean the WMF can't be sued, in the United
States or elsewhere, but I think Thomas was answering the question of
in the original post (why should we delete these images): it protects
uploaders and reusers from content that is not freely licensed.

Nathan