On 6/12/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/12/06, Fastfission <fastfission(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
The full copyright status would, in my opinion,
be a very strong "fair
use" claim regarding the original photograph, and a strong copyright
claim to the transformative work, which could then be licensed CC-SA
etc. after that.
How can it be fair use if it's not being critiqued, or in any way
referred to explicitly? The derivative work is simply being used to
illustrate the concept, not the photographer or the photograph.
Steve
You're confusing Wikipedia's rules as to what types of fair use are
acceptable *on Wikipedia*, with the legal principle of fair use.
Fair use does not require that the original is being critiqued, that
is merely one way to get one fair use factor to lean in your favor.
I seriously doubt that photo is a copyright infringement, no matter
what article it happens to be used in. But I also don't see why it's
appropriate *for Wikipedia*, unless we happen to have an article which
is discussing the original, or at the very least, the event. (In the
case of talking about the event there are probably better drawings
which could be made, though.)
Anthony