On 6/2/07, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca> wrote:
Then why do we bother putting extra tags on images
that are of disputed
fair use status?
Fair use isn't baltent copyvio
This whole copyright argument is really a non-starter.
Even in the cases
where there's _blatant_ copyright violation, as in a letter-for-letter
copy and paste from a webpage with a clear copyright notice in flaming
letters thirty feet high, the standard procedure as described on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_problems is to simply
_blank_ the page and replace it with a {{copyvio}} template. The
article's history remains intact and accessible for at least 7 days
while the listing is on the copyright problems page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CSD#G12
The speedy deletion of BJAODN goes way beyond this
process even though
it should be vastly _easier_ to resolve any potential copyright issues.
This is all stuff that was released under the GFDL at some point, all we
need to do is confirm its pedigree.
You have acess to deletion logs prior to 2005?
--
geni