Image talk:Israeli Soldiers with LB Hezbollah Flags.jpg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] thE PICTURE COPYRIGHT SITUATION

look at this picture.[1] This picture is got from NYtimes [2] and the copyright of what is pulished in this site shows anybody can't distribute it.[3]:

Copyright Notice: All materials contained on this site are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of The New York Times Company or in the case of third party materials, the owner of that content. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. However, you may download material from The New York Times on the Web (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal, noncommercial use only. --212.6.32.3 13:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

And it can't be "fair use" because the content of the article is against the meanin that this picture shows."Israel Finding a Difficult Foe in Hezbollah ."[4]--212.6.32.3 13:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Your knowledge of copyright law is lacking in that: (1) corporations can't enforce restrictions on use that violate fair use rights and (2) your claim that the interpretation of the image matters to fail use is false. --Cyde↔Weys 15:03, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe that the use of this neutral, copyrighted image constitutes Fair use in my understanding of this for the reasons stated. This photograph is my suggestion to represent all sides in the conflict—I am open to others. The NYT used it for this article, but I botched the copyright holder in my download spec: it's Kai Pfaffenbach from Reuters. The Times used this image for their article, but the image does not necessarily have anything to do with the subject of that article. Finally, I'll observe that we have not been able to agree upon a neutral NPOV image for this article, which supports my assertion that "No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information," consistent with the Fair use stipulations. As I say, I am open to other suggestions, but this is a good one. Cyde, I'd appreciate your wisdom on this issue -- I'll go with whatever you say here. AdamKesher 15:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the provisions of fair use law that govern whether we can use an image that is being used to actively solicit royalties from news agencies. In my opinion one of the weakest parts of Wikipedia is that it expects its editors to be copyright lawyers. --Cyde↔Weys 15:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

According to the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act of 1976, four factors must be considered: 1. purpose of use, 2. nature of the work, 3. amount of the work used, & 4. the possible impact on the market value of the work. Posting a commercially distributed Reuters image on Wikipedia impacts factor 4 by devaluing the photograph (this is why don't other publications can't simply use the photo without first attaining a license or paying royalties).

Thankfully Wikipedia policy doesn't require one to trudge through the rigors of analyzing copyright law. This image violates the second criterion of WP:FUC. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 17:22, 26 July 2006 (UTC)