[Wikipedia-l] I don't care what Richard Stallman would say

[Ray Saintonge]

Sean Barrett wrote:

>>I want the images. Those who took the images WANT us to use them
>>(provided we reference them). Readers want the images. Mirrors of
>>Wikipedia want the images. The copyright laws are stupid. GFDL is
>>stupid. And the right way to get stupid laws changed is not to obey
>>them. 
>>
>Not obeying stupid laws doesn't get them changed; it bankrupts the
>violator from court costs and penalties.
>
Civil disobedience can be perfectly acceptable, but I think we're still 
quite far from even needing to consider that as a tactic.  There is 
nothing illegal about fair use, so what law is being broken?  There are 
still a number of steps to be followed (like a take down notice) before 
court costs and penalties become a factor.  This alarmism is just 
another version of copyright paranoia.

>>Be reasonable.
>>
>It's easy to be "reasonable" when it's someone else you are driving
>into bankruptcy on your whim.
>
>And not realizing that flagrant violations of the law will not result
>in widespread freedom, but rather the complete disappearance of
>Wikipedia is not reasonable, it is ... well, to use your word: stupid.
>
Being "reasonable" does not include "flagrant" violations.  Flagrant 
violations are not the problem.  The problem illustrations all have a 
strong element of reasonable doubt attached to them.  There is no need 
to use whatever interpretation of the law would give us a worst case 
scenario.  If there is a reasonable interpretation of the law which 
favours us we should follow that.

.Ec