On 1/27/07, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Most money is protected by copyright.
Right. It can only be reproduced if it can't be mistaken for actual
currency. But that means that images of money are not free content. Should
we remove all images of money from Wikipedia?
<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Nazi_Swastika.svg
This is an SVG image released into the public domain by its copyright
holder. That's about as free as you can get. But it is not freely
reproducible in Germany. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Germany
Should we remove all Nazi insignia from
Wikipedia?
Quotations are not free content, and cannot be licensed under the GFDL.
Should we remove all quotations from Wikipedia? Should we delete Wikiquote?
<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_FAQ#Can_I_reuse_Wikipedia.…
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tianasquare.jpg
This is not free content. Should we remove it from Wikipedia? (I can think
of a few people who would want it removed, but I hope they aren't Wikipedia
editors...)
This movement to destroy all fair use content is incredibly misguided. Just
looking through the file names of some of our fair use and permission-only
images, I'm appalled that anyone who shares in the ideals of this project
would want to prohibit them.
Image:Armeniangenocide-streets.jpg
Image:Beslan child running.jpg
Image:032806 francelaborprotests2.jpg
Image:Aa McVeigh bombing.jpg
Image:1938 Jews arrested during Kristallnacht line up for roll call at
Buchenwald.jpg
The whole concept behind fair use is the protection of free speech in the
face of information-imprisoning copyright laws. The whole concept behind
"free as in free speech" content is to produce information that can't ever
be locked up by copyright law. I can't fathom why anyone would think that
one concept is noble and the other evil.