[WikiEN-l] Next step in "fair use" cleanup?

[MacGyverMagic/Mgm]

On 3/24/06, KWH <k.w.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/23/06, "Matt Brown" <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 3/23/06, jkelly at fas.harvard.edu <jkelly at fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
> > >   I think that this is largely true.  My suggestion was meant to be more
> > > conservative, in that it would only expedite deletion of media where we are
> > > saying "This is fair use", and it is being used in an article, but we have no
> > > rationale whatsoever.
> >
> > Fair enough.  Is it required that the original uploader provide the
> > fair use rationale, or can someone else?  If we require the original
> > uploader, that might be a problem.  If you're not the original
> > uploader, but provide a rationale, are you thereby assuming
> > responsibility for a copyright lawsuit?
> >
> > -Matt
>
> I've done a bit of thinking on this, and I believe that whoever
> includes the image tag in the article would be responsible for
> preparing a work containing the fair use material. If User A uploads
> the image, B puts it in the article, and then C breezes by and puts a
> fair use justification, then B would probably be responsible; but if D
> comes by and corrects a typo in the article and leaves the image tag
> in, then D could become responsible.
>
> But this is all hopelessly speculative. My opinion is that the purpose
> that the source, tag, and fair use justification serve is allowing
> downstream consumers of the image database (future editors and also
> those who download the wikipedia database to build fork sites) to make
> a solid determination of whether they want to include the image in
> their work. It's a form of "rights clearance" database.
>
> Legal arguments about the fair use rationale are hopeless. Any lawyer
> qualified to give advice on the matter would not give it for free on
> the Internet without that famous disclaimer, "this does not constitute
> legal advice, contact a licensed professional...", q.v.
> [[Wikipedia:Legal disclaimer]]. I think my own opinion is pretty good
> just as an average US citizen with an interest in the law, but I won't
> bore anyone with it unless upon request. Therefore the bottom line is
> anyone who's concerned about themselves should talk to a lawyer about
> their specific case.
>
> The decision is quite simply: "if I decide to take this article and
> edit it, and there is an image included in the previous version, do I
> want to include it in my version? Do I feel comfortable with the
> source and fair use justification? Would I feel better if I removed or
> replaced it, and why?" Life's much easier when you consider it in that
> light.
>
> [[User:Kwh]]
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
You can't expect someone to take responsibility for an picture someone
else put in an article. Too many people know too little about
copyright law or are just completely ignorant.

I think we should have some project that tags images as they come in
(or throws them out) to stop this from getting out of hand and to make
sure valid images aren't deleted just because the original uploader
forgot to tag it. All of them should get reviewed by at least 3 people
before being thrown out. Deleting something is very easy, a similar
effort should be made to tag an image properly.

Mgm