[WikiEN-l] Is this valid on an userpage? is this other on articles?

[Pedro Sanchez]

On 1/15/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Bryan Derksen wrote:
>
> >Pedro Sanchez wrote:
> >
> >
> >>See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mondrian_CompRYB.jpg
> >>is it fair use?
> >>
> >>
> >Fair use depends on what specific use it is being put to, so there's no
> >one universal "yes" or "no" answer.
> >
> This is exactly why fair use presents us with such difficulties.  There
> are many instances where uses that would likely be recognized as fair
> use by the courts, are not acceptable as fair use in Wikipedia.  This is
> a matter risk tolerance, and how much of a safety margin some of us feel
> comfortable with.  Naturally, that varies with the individual.
>
> >>it's used on a bazillion userpages
> >>
> >>
> >Fair use of images on user pages is never permitted, in accordance with
> >item number 9 at
> >[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy]. This image
> >appears to be so widespread in userspace because it was in a userbox at
> >[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:1ne/Userboxes/User_abstractions] so
> >I've removed it from there.
> >
> They are never permitted on the English Wikipedia.  The rule could be
> different in the Portuguese Wikipedia.

Well, not on portuguese.. since pt doesnt' have local uploads and
commonswon't take "fair use", so not in that case

>
> >>how about using them in galleries?
> >>
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abstract_art&diff=100274330&oldid=99549887
> >>
> >>
> >To be valid fair use the article should be about that specific image in
> >some significant way. If there was a paragraph or section of the article
> >addressing it, perhaps - though in that case it would make more sense to
> >have the image presented individually in that paragraph or section. I'd
> >say it's best to assume not when the case is in doubt.
> >
> This, of course, reflects the English Wikipedia subset of fair use rules.
>
> >Some editors are hypersensitive about this sort of thing. I still can't
> >figure out why the original image of the O RLY? owl isn't fair use in
> >the article [[O RLY?]], but endless battle isn't worth it.
> >
> This photo may be in the public domain by abandonment.  This would
> happen when an otherwise copyright item has been widely re-distributed
> for a long time, and the copyright owner does nothing about it.  This
> photo was taken by a professional wildlife photographer who should have
> a basic understanding of the rules.  He uploaded the photo himself.  Is
> there any record of his complaining about its general use?
>
> This is an argument that I would use with extreme caution.  I would
> define "long time" in this to be at least three years, that being the
> U.S. statutory limitation period for launching copyright infringement
> complaints in the courts.
>
> Ec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>