On 27/09/2007, Matthew Brown <morven(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/27/07, Nick <heligolandwp(a)googlemail.com>
wrote:
> I'd imagine we'll be pretty safe as long
as we don't accept seriously
> substandard photographs of celebrities
I think you're rather off base with regards to
defamation. A shot
doesn't have to be great to not be defaming. Average quality, or even
below average quality, are fine. There MIGHT be an issue in certain
jurisdictions if we deliberately used a picture that makes someone
look truly awful or suggests something about the person that is
malicious, but that's a hard bar to clear against editorial content.
Yeah. I don't think we have any celebrity shots that are actually
disrespectful of their subject in that manner, without a relevant
editorial reason. (e.g. mug shots)
People who want to use publicity shots on Wikipedia to
replace
free-content fan-provided shots tend to use this kind of argument,
which is inaccurate.
I think that Richard Schiff photo is a strong argument in favour of
securing all the good publicity shots we can!
- d.