[WikiEN-l] Questionable fair use claims: a case study

[Anthony DiPierro]

On 10/20/05, uninvited at nerstrand.net <uninvited at nerstrand.net> wrote:
>
> I don't care much about this particular image, but I see this as a
> bellwether for the broader issue of dealing with the thousands of
> images we have where there is a doubtful fair use claim being made by
> the uploader. The process for handling such images is unclear, at
> least to me, with the IFD, PUI, and CV (copyright violations) pages
> having overlapping purpose and conflicting processes. Any of these
> processes are cumbersome, with notification required to the uploader
> and ongoing monitoring to shepherd the image through the process. And
> all of these processes are heavily biased towards inclusion. Decisions
> to keep fair use images are being made by admins who don't understand
> fair use and don't appreciate the stakes.

 I believe CV is for copyright violations, PUI is for unfree (or possibly
unfree) images which aren't necessarily copyright violations, and IFD is for
the rest. In this case, I'd say the image was clearly unfree, and probably
not a copyright violation, so PUI is probably the right place for it.

But none of this should be necessary simply to remove the image from the
article(s), and in my opinion that's much more important than deleting the
image from the site, especially for cases which might not be a copyright
violation and for which the copyright holder isn't yelling at us to remove
the image. That's just my opinion, though.
 Anthony