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