[Wikipedia-l] What would Richard Stallman say?

[Delirium]

Erik Moeller wrote:

>Jimmy-
>  
>
>>The moral argument is the one that matters.  Should we make use of
>>materials that are available only to us because of our special
>>circumstances, or should we follow a purist GNU philosophy?
>>    
>>
>
>We should strike a reasonable balance, and that means that images which  
>are clearly unobtainable under a free license but historically important  
>works should be used as fair use. Copyright law is restrictive enough as  
>it is, it would be a big mistake not to exploit the few exemptions it  
>grants us, under the guise of being "more free". In fact, by rejecting  
>fair use, we effectively endorse restrictive copyright doctrines.
>  
>
FWIW, I vaguely agree with both Jimbo and Erik on this point.  I 
strongly prefer Free images wherever possible, but I don't think we 
should entirely refrain from using fair use images.

I would, however, support us doing so very carefully, and only when 
necessary.  Furthermore, I think we should restrict our fair use images 
to fairly unambiguous cases of fair use, at least informally.  A very 
famous photograph of an event from WW2, for example, is pretty clear 
fair use for almost all users.

Images licensed "for Wikipedia use only" or "for non-commercial use 
only" are another matter, and possibly even GFDL-incompatible---and at 
the very least something I don't like.

So, to summarize, my position is:
* Strongly prefer GFDL or public domain images
* Allow fair use images in cases where GFDL or public domain images are 
unavailable, with a strong preference towards clear-cut fair use cases 
that would also be fair use for most reusers of our content
* Do not accept special-permission images

-Mark