On 10/20/05, uninvited@nerstrand.net uninvited@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