[Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week

[Marco Chiesa]

David Strauss wrote:

>While I think fair use media is more integral to the English Wikipedia's
>content than you do, I agree with your reasoning. Whether or not we
>allow fair use, non-commercial media is unjustified.
>
>Can everyone here agree that non-commercial media is not a *substitute*
>for fair-use media?
>
>  
>
To be honest, I agree only to a certain point. Fair use means using a 
copyrighted media without asking the permission to the owner, with the 
justification that there's not much else you can do. Now, what is the 
problem if, in order to illustrate the same thing, you use a NC media 
because that's the freest you can get. You're using a NC material that 
you think it qualifies as fair use. You put a fair use tag, I put a NC 
tag because fair use is helpless to me.

I agree that if you can have a free media for something, then you 
shouldn't use a non-free one. And I can understand the idea that if  you 
need to illustrate something for which no free media is available, you 
may consider using a non-free one using a fair use justification. What 
is the problem if THAT media for which you claim fair use has a licence 
which is not free enough (i.e. a NC tag)?

Marco