[WikiEN-l] Re: Non-free images, there has to be a better way

[Michael Snow]

Matt Brown wrote:

>One thing that I think is needed is to have as policy that if a free
>image can be found to replace a fair use image, then the fair use
>image can be disposed of.  I've experienced a number of times
>situations where users have strenuously resisted getting rid of a fair
>use image they like when a free one comes along.  Some situations,
>indeed, when users have replaced an existing, free image with a fair
>use one because they find, e.g., an official publicity shot more
>'professional' than a photograph by a Wikipedian.
>  
>
In general, I think it would be a good guideline. However, I think the 
quality of the replacement does need to be considered, though the issue 
should not be professionalism as such. Rather, in some cases it's more 
the question of "can we confidently say that this blurry photo is 
'Subject X'?" If the subject of the free image is clearly identifiable 
and there are no reasons to doubt its provenance, then by all means the 
fair use one should go.

>For example, there is one user that is using scans of auto magazine
>covers to illustrate articles about the magazine cover's subject.  I
>think that is beyond the scope of fair use.  It's one thing to use a
>Motor Trend cover to illustrate the [[Motor Trend]] article; another
>to use it to illustrate an article about a car that happened to be on
>the cover that month.
>  
>
Indeed. At whatever point we manage to organize a serious cleanup of 
fair use images, there are two matters to address. One is the presence 
of images where the fair use claim is simply bogus. The other is the 
whether the use in any given article is actually fair. *Every use* must 
be considered separately; the fact that one may be acceptable means very 
little when you've moved to an article about a different subject.

--Michael Snow