On 1/13/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
On 1/12/06, Sam Korn <smoddy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It's quite simple really. Wikipedia's
biggest reason for qualifying
for fair use is that it is a free educational resource.
Everyone "qualifies" for fair use. The fact that Wikipedia is an
educational resource is *one factor* in whether or not its use of
certain images in certain ways is fair use.
My phrasing was wrong, forgive me. I meant to say that Wikipedia's
biggest asset in asserting that its use of copyright media is fair use
is that it is a free educational resource.
Userpages are
just not educational.
In general most userpages have a lessened educational purpose than
articles. I wouldn't go any further than that. I certainly wouldn't
say "userpages are just not educational".
Um, I have never seen an educational userpage. Have you an example?
User pages
would, if I read the situation
right, be very little different from a GeoCities website or the
equivilent.
You definitely read it wrong. Wikipedia userpages are, in general,
very different from the average geocities website.
How?
Image use
would not qualify as fair use there; why should it here?
Image use can and often does qualify as fair use there.
On someone's personal website about themselves? Either you Merkins
have *seriously* liberal copyright laws or we're talking at
cross-purposes.
The only reason I can see not to use fair use images
on user pages is
that it is never necessary. So rather than waste time arguing case by
case with each other you just ban it completely.
At least we agree on something!
--
Sam