[WikiEN-l] Fair use redux; the second coming of hell; Are we a free content or aren't we?

[Ray Saintonge]

Bryan Derksen wrote:

>WikipediaEditor Durin wrote:
>  
>
>>en.wikipedia is utterly failing at executing the Foundation's mission, and
>>it is THE flagship project.
>>    
>>
>This is unwarranted hyperbole. 
>
I agree.  Such hyperbole does nothing for finding solutions.

>If we're utterly failing, why is
>Wikipedia a top-10 website that's rapidly gaining cachet as the first
>place to look for general information, why is Britannica in terror of
>us, and (specifically on the "free" front) why is the Wikipedia database
>being used by literally hundreds of mirrors?
>
The photo archives are scared too.  Once enough free material is 
available on-line the markets for their proprietary stock will collapse.

>Also, bear in mind that "free" is only one half of our fundamental goal.
>The other half is "encyclopedia". Adding fair use content may restrict
>the "free" half while enhancing the "encyclopedia" half, so it's hardly
>an obvious net loss.
>
>The same rationales that we use for fair use images can be used by
>others who wish to use Wikipedia's material in the same context (as an
>educational encyclopedia), so it's not like the fair use images are
>completely useless for people wishing to reuse our content. They just
>have to make the judgement for themselves which licences are compatible
>with their use and strip out the bits that aren't.
>
I have always felt that a policy where we would not allow fair use 
because we could not guarantee that it would be fair use when used by a 
downstream user has been unrealistic  On the other hand pushing our use 
of fair use to its extremes would be foolish.

Ec