[WikiEN-l] BetacommandBot, (currently) centralized discussion

[geni]

On 23/02/2008, WJhonson at aol.com <WJhonson at aol.com> wrote:
>  The point is, that the legalistic interpretation of what is "free" under  the
>  license is so narrow that we've been blocked from posting for example images
>  off book covers, which is tendentious.

I assume you mean book covers that have not entered the public domain
or been released under a free license? Such images cannot be
considered free under any reasonable definition of the term.

>  No author, or publisher, to my knowledge has ever complained *to* us about
>  these.

So?

>Tendentious editors who want only *self-created* photographs are
>  disrupting the project.
>
>  That's my opinion.
>
>
>  Will Johnson


Where a reasonable fair use justification can be made book covers are
usable under existing policy.


-- 
geni