[WikiEN-l] Technical solution to bad fair use (was:Uploading images should be a privilige...)

[Oldak Quill]

On 03/08/06, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> The value is project-wide, not necessarily on an article-by-article
> basis. And I think Jimbo would say that a high quality encyclopedia is
> never at odds with producing a free one. Wikipedia could still be high
> quality even if it lacked fair use images. Most encyclopedias do *not*
> have an image for every article and do not feel the need to, much less
> images of lesser known celebrities and video games.

I would consider these two, and other similar types of articles (such
as on films and television programs), to be the only articles which
truly warrant Fair Use images. I think there is use in providing an
image with close to every article - it displays information in a
different form and can be highly enlightening to a user. Anything
which is accessible to the public should have free images (objects,
places and people).

The [[David Bowie]] article gets around the lack of free use
photographs by using a free use drawing. It looks like it could be a
drawing of a photograph and is certainly recognisable as David Bowie.
When does a drawing start violating copyright? Drawings are quite
subjective, is there much value in them?
-- 
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)