IMO, something like this is acceptable - but I would also like to see the images wrapped with a notice of some kind (a small table?), so visitors know immediately that they are not inherently part of the article.
And also to produce an incentive for Wikipedia authors to find free alternatives when it's possible.
-- Daniel
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Optim wrote:
if I understood well, you suggest having a database of fair use images which can be hyperlinked from Wikipedia articles but they will never be inline.
If I understood correctly then I agree! According to my moral standards this is ok. However I cannot talk about the law because IANAL.
--Optim
--- Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com wrote:
On Feb 19, 2004, at 21:08, Delirium wrote:
There is the aggregation defense that has
been alluded to, but I think
inserting an image in-line in an article is
clearly making it part of
the article as one work, not merely
distributing it on the same
medium. If all the images were on separate
pages (as in an appendix,
perhaps), then that'd be another matter.
On that note, a question for the folks who aren't willing to give up "fair use images": would an 'appendix' system be acceptable to you?
What I'm envisioning is an associated site to which non-PD non-GFDL
but-probably-ok-under-fair-use-for-a-non-profit-encyclopedia
could be uploaded and linked _from there_ to Wikipedia article names. The page display on *.wikipedia.org could see when there's an associated page and include a more or less prominent link to the photo/media page. (For those familiar with Ward's Wiki, this would be similar to how SisterSites links work.)
To summarize:
- images which can only be justified as "fair
use" (for some uses, in the US only) would not be uploaded to Wikipedia itself, embedded in Wikipedia articles, or included in basic Wikipedia page/media dumps
- but those images could be made available
through Wikimedia's sites (for acceptably fair use, in the US) and hyperlinked to Wikipedia articles (not inline)
- redistributors who determined the images were
ok could still take them
- redistributors who might not be able to use
them don't have to mess with it
Would this be acceptable from legal, moral, and other standpoints?
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
ATTACHMENT part 1.2 application/pgp-signature
x-mac-type=70674453; name=PGP.sig
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l