Anonymous user
Forum:Proposing a Files and Images Policy: Difference between revisions
Forum:Proposing a Files and Images Policy (edit)
Revision as of 20:07, 29 November 2012
, 11 years ago→Discussion
imported>LostInRiverview |
imported>Lost Labyrinth |
||
Line 34:
:::To briefly explain fair use... A person who creates original works, like an author, artist, or video game conglomerate, holds a copyright on all works they produce. This gives that person/company the exclusive right to sell the content and to reproduce it. The copyright holder can choose to waive that right (thus putting the work in public domain) or can be contacted on a case-by-case basis to allow their works to be used by a third-party. It would be impractical if not impossible for TSW to contact EA and ask for permission every time someone uploaded an image to the wiki. Fortunately, there's the Fair Use doctrine.
:::Essentially, Fair Use states that the right of a copyright holder to control the use of their copyrighted material might be challenged if certain criteria were met. These criteria include use of copyrighted material for the purposes of educating, reporting news, or critiquing. So when we upload EA-copyrighted images to the wiki, we almost always do so with the intent that the image will help us illustrate something; thus our use of the image falls under a fair use justification. - '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">LiR</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">speak</font>]] ~ [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">read</font>]]</sup>''' 14:43, November 29, 2012 (UTC)
We've needed something concrete on files for a while now anyway. While I do believe that the problems we have with the File namespace extend beyond that of licensing (file names come to mind), we may as well tackle one thing at a time. I support this proposal although I'm not too sure whether or not [[TSW:ER]] would be practical to enforce for repeated offenders as although it's aim is to get the message across of what is and isn't okay, it can also seem like the warning process is being prolonged with very little progress, should it get to stage 4. If this policy is implemented then anything we add to ER on constant offenders would be implicitly stated in the policy anyway. {{LabSig}} 20:07, November 29, 2012 (UTC)
| |||