[Foundation-l] Fair use being badly abused on en.wikipedia

[Nathan]

Wouldn't it make sense to enforce the restrictions on non-free images
prior to upload rather than after, when its become viewed as 'content'
part of an article and folks are distressed about deleting it?

If the object is to use non-free content only where we have to and
until we no longer have to (which it is) then each instance of
non-free content should be reviewed against this rubric before being
uploaded into the article space. By a person, or a group of people.
This may create a different sort of backlog than what we've got, but
at least it is a review/inclusion backlog rather than a deletion
backlog.

Uploading is easy - making a superficially sufficient fair use
rationale is easy. Finding and deleting these images once they have
been uploaded is difficult, and the images are a risk and a violation
of our license while they remain. Therefore, the logical response is
to make uploading non-free content harder.

Nathan

On Jan 7, 2008 2:04 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2008 1:06 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > That said, even what is permitted by law seems to be more restrictive than
> > > what is currently occurring on the English Wikipedia.
> >
> > Really? If that's the case, then Mike needs to step in and tell us.
>
>
> Woah there. Mike Godwin is not your attorney.
>
> He has more important (and less risky) tasks than following your
> contribs and wagging his finger at you for breaking the law.
>
> When you publish material on Wikipedia ensuring that you are
> conforming with the law is your responsibility.
>
> In order to avoid multiple posts, I'll just state the rest of what I
> would say to the thread here:
>
> There clearly has been plenty of abuse of non-free images on Wikipedia
> in the past.  Many cases of diagrams illustrations taken from recent
> textbooks and used to illustrate Wikipedia articles on the same
> subjects, for example.
>
> The issue at hand here is, I think, one of conflating a half dozen
> different types of non-free image issue as one. There are issues of
> content shoveled into Wikipedia with nary a thought. There are issues
> of clearly illegal unlicensed use of copyrighted material. There are
> issues of material whos use discourages the creation of freely
> licensed replacements, etc.
>
> Many Wikipedians call all these issues "fair use issues", and while
> there often is some amount of overlap, they are not the same.
>
> When we pretend that they are the same we end up talking past each
> other, one person concerned about clearly illegal uses, another person
> responding that something isn't illegal just because it lacks a
> template. It's simply not productive.
>
> I have been watching (and sometimes helping) with these matters as
> long as just about anyone else around here.  I am quiet convinced that
> the worst of the issues have greatly improved over time, and that the
> average cases are not spirialing out of control.
>
> Please take a breath and relax.  Then thank the people around you who
> have been working on these issues, no matter what 'side' they appear
> to be arguing today. These are hard and stressful matters to work on
> and the people standing up to them deserve everyone's support, if not
> agreement.
>
> Just remember that passion is often the enemy of reason. There are
> solid objective reasons that can be invoked to support your arguments
> on these subjects. Use them. And realize that all who are taking the
> time to address this battle care deeply for the project even if they
> do not share your exact position.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>