[WikiEN-l] More fair use image overreaching

[geni]

On 04/03/2008, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Ah! But then, given our usual practice of prompt response to complaints
>  we could argue that there was no excuse for them to wait until there
>  were 1000 images, which were perhaps uploaded over an extended period of
>  time.  Surely a rights owner with so many images must have a means of
>  detecting copyvios more efficiently, unless he were trying to sandbag us
>  by letting the violations accumulate.  That kind of behaviour would not
>  impress a judge.

At the moment they would probably have to employ picscout and that
would be expensive. Screenshots are even more problematical

>  Album or book covers are likely categories where we would have large
>  numbers of images.  Does it not seem strange that given the number of
>  album coves illustrated on the net there is a complete absence of cases
>  about album covers from an industry that is so famously litigious about
>  copying its music? Maybe there's an unspoken industry standard.
>


No the reason is that most of the sites with significant numbers of
album covers on are things like iTunes which music companies are
hardly going to object to (well no more so than normal anyway) or took
down the images rather than take things to court (CDCovers.cc):

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/3608.cfm


-- 
geni