On 9/12/05, uninvited(a)nerstrand.net <uninvited(a)nerstrand.net> wrote:
At present I am more interested in policy matters. I
do not believe
that I can accomplish anything meaningful by my own extensive use of
and involvement in an existing copyvio image process that (a) is far
more work for the listing admin than the uploader, (b) takes weeks to
reach resolution in uncontroversial cases, and (c) has an excessive
inclusion bias for copyvio images with a fair use claim. I'm willing
to review images, and list them for deletion, but not until the policy
issues are properly addressed. I have had too much Wikistress in the
past trying to work to implement things that lacked definition.
What I was getting at was the fact that you were specifically
complaining about people not wanting to delete anything. I didn't see
where the evidence of that was -- if you could throw a link or two my
way it would make it easier to see that.
At present, the project isn't soundly grounded in
legal advice. I'm not
an attorney so I can't fix that. However I do disagree with the other
WikiProject members in several important areas. I believe this is a
matter better resolved by competent counsel rather than by compromise
and consensus. That is why I have brought it here.
I believe, for example, that we do not accomplish anything meaningful by
using low-resolution images and sound clips; consenus appears to be that
resolution limits are important. I don't think that discussing or
voting on this will help us because it is better settled by sound legal
advice. I don't think it is in the best interests of the project to
have a bunch of laypeople (non-lawyers) dream up fair use policy.
OK. Then don't complain about how you've tried to discuss this and
haven't gotten anywhere with it. You haven't tried to discuss it. In
the end, the hope is that one of our Wikilawyer types will look over
all of the things we've been working on. But they're probably busy
too. Better a dreamed up fair use policy based on some understanding
of copyright law than no fair use policy at all. I don't think most of
our legal understandings are really so baseless -- there is a heap of
caselaw on the usage of small or degraded media in regards to fair use
-- but then again, hey! I'm not a lawyer, so what the hell do I know.
If you want discussion, it's there for you. If you want "just
discussion with lawyers" then you'd better find a few lawyers who want
to participate. They're welcome to participate too if they want to.
You've named a few miscellaneous issues here, none of which you've
bothered raising on the project talk page, or really anywhere else for
that matter. So I'm not sure why you're clamoring about your lack of
discussion -- it's clear that what you really want is some closure.
Which is fine -- wouldn't we all like that? -- but don't make it out
like you're being ignored. You are, erm, "invited" to participate in
the wiki way.
I'd love it if some legal types would stop by and take a look at what
we're up to, give some guidance when it comes down to it. At the
moment we're trying to get something basic together, something to work
with, and correct the obvious problems of the current policy which
have allowed things to get a bit out of control. Which is frankly
better than nothing, in my opinion. If your attempts to get
unequivocal answers to difficult and murky questions turns up anything
useful, please feel free to let the rest of us know. In the meantime,
we'll continue our work.
FF