User:Travb/Fair use

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< User:Travb

[edit] Fight for another day

The image above is an Associated Press photograph.

It was taken by Jeff Widener on June 5, 1989. 'Permission Note -- written permission was received from AP on 29 January 2005 which states:

"Wikipedia is only authorized to display this image to its users. Permission is not granted for copying or redistribution in or through any other medium. Image must be provided with the following credit: "Jeff Widener (The Associated Press)."

[edit] Questions to ask

Often, it's difficult to know whether a court will consider a proposed use to be fair. The fair use statute requires the courts to consider the following questions in deciding this issue:

Is it a competitive use? (In other words, if the use potentially affects the sales of the copied material, it's usually not fair.) § 107 (1)

How much material was taken compared to the entire work of which the material was a part? (The more someone takes, the less likely it is that the use is fair.) § 107 (3)

How was the material used? Is it a transformative use? (If the material was used to help create something new it is more likely to be considered a fair use that if it is merely copied verbatim into another work. Criticism, comment, news reporting, research, scholarship and non-profit educational uses are most likely to be judged fair uses. Uses motivated primarily by a desire for a commercial gain are less likely to be fair use). § 107 (4)

As a general rule, if you are using a small portion of somebody else's work in a non-competitive way and the purpose for your use is to benefit the public, you're on pretty safe ground. On the other hand, if you take large portions of someone else's expression for your own purely commercial reasons, the rule usually won't apply.

“The distinction between “fair use” and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission.” http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

[edit] Case law

Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation

Commercial use is one thing--$$ is involved. The courts have NEVER rulked against fair use by a noncommercial educational user like Wiki.^{[citation needed]} Rjensen 05:52, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Resources

[edit] Pro bono laywers

http://www.lessig.org/

http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/

Berkman_Center_for_Internet_and_Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/home/

Google search: "pro bono" "intellectual property" lawyers

[edit] Google Book Search

Google Book Search: Keeping the facts straight

Google Groups on Google Book Search

[edit] Quotes from Jimbo Wales

"Wikipedia goal is to create a free, democratic, reliable encyclopedia—actually, the largest encyclopedia in history, in terms of both breadth and depth. This is an ambitious goal, and will probably take many years to achieve!"--[1]

"Finally, we should never forget as a community that we are the vanguard of a knowledge revolution that will transform the world. We are the leading edge innovators and leaders of what is becoming a global movement to free knowledge from proprietary constraints. 100 years from now, the idea of a proprietary textbook or encyclopedia will sound as quaint and remote as we now think of the use of leeches in medical science." ---Free Knowledge requires Free Software and Free File Formats

"Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing." -Jimmy Wales, July 2004[2]

"Wikipedia is first and foremost an effort to create and distribute a free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality to every single person on the planet in their own language. Asking whether the community comes before or after this goal is really asking the wrong question: the entire purpose of the community is precisely this goal." -- Wikipedia-l mailing list, March 8, 2005[3]

"Fair use (and the narrower fair dealing) is an important freedom from abuse by copyright holders. It is good to see a decision which supports it." [4]

[edit] Personal efforts

[edit] The Time magazine reponse

Subject: RE: AskArchivist

Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:51:30 -0500

From: Bonnie_KrollREMOVE@timeinc.com Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert

To: travb**@yahoo.com

Thanks for submitting your question to Ask the Archivist.

Fair use doctrine allows you to use a reasonable text excerpt with a link back to the entire article at time.com.

You may also use a thumbnail of our cover images, as long as you link back to a page on time.com.

Best regards,

Bonnie Kroll

Ask the Archivist

http://www.timearchives.com

*** city ***

*** , Texas

*** comments ***

Hi,

There is a huge debate over at wikipedia about the use of your covers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Fair_use_TIME_magazine_covers

This issue would be solved quickly if you could answer my question:

Would the use of thumbnails on Wikipedia be opposed by Time Magazine?

*** uemail ***

*** @yahoo.com

*** uname ***

TravB**

*** x ***

*** y ***

Signed:Travb 02:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My message to Ta bu shi da yu

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ta_bu_shi_da_yu/Archive_21#Time_Magazine_Covers

Deletion of time covers borders on vandalism. I am a law student and am familar with fair use, reading much of the case law on the subject. Your deletions are unnecessary. The time covers fit well withing "fair use". There is case law which supports this, the case that immediatly comes to mind is the case where the person used a smaller picture to illustrate an idea, which is very similar to the Time covers.

I will warn you once. If you continue to delete the covers, I will report you too vandalism in progress. If necessary, I will do everything in my power to stop your destructive edits.Travb 22:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ta bu shi da yu repsonse

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Travb/Archive_3#Go_ahead_punk (emphasis my own)

Go ahead punk

Report me. Almost none of those images are lower resolution. I'm not going to put Wikipedia at risk, no matter that you say you are a lawyer or not. Half of those images shouldn't be used to illustrate the articles anyway. My deleting will continue until a Foundation member or Jimbo tells me otherwise. - Ta bu shi da yu 23:00, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requests_for_comment

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Ta_bu_shi_da_yu_2

I am impressed, Ta bu shi da yu seems to know the exact legal dimension of what a thumbnail should be, when the entire US legal community does not. The Appelate court in Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation did not define what size thumbnail should be, I quote the info on wikipedia: It appears that US search engines may use thumbnails of images (size limits not determined). I would be interested how Ta bu shi da yu decided that 46kb is too large, what case law is he relying on? ....Travb 04:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Signed:Travb 02:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ed g2s and Uncyclopedia_logo

From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ed_g2s#Uncyclopedia_logo

This is in response to your removal of the Uncyclopedia logo from my userpage and apparently many other pages on Wikipedia. The logo was created by me (Rcmurphy on Uncyc) as a parody of the Wikipedia logo, using only a partial overlay of the globe puzzle piece outlines to trace part of the potato face design. No part of the WP logo was used in my potato.

Uncyclopedia's license is not free, but I'd like to allow the logo to be used for Wikipedia userpages, userboxes, etc. - in other words, as "decoration" for Wikipedians. It's in the spirit of our project. --Rcmurphy 15:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Signed:Travb 02:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Except for the fact that Rcmurphy's logo may be considered an infringement of Wikipedia's copyright, therefore illegal, yup, that's about right. Second of all, the author can allow whatever he wants, he does no longer own any rights to the image (I believe so, although I'm not entirely familiar with US legislation in these matters), it was released under Uncyclopedia's licence (that is not free), and as I stated above it may be copyright Wikimedia, therefore not publishable in user pages any-way. In either case, you can-not use the logo outside the main name-space. +Hexagon1 (talk)

07:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ed g2s and copyright

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dolby_Digital&diff=prev&oldid=53781967

Tens of thousands of photos being deleted by Ed g2s:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Ed_g2s

Signed:Travb 02:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use tags

Used under the fair use policy of the United States copyright law, and under Wikipedia fair use policy

This article is copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. User Travb (we) is/are making such material available in my (our) efforts to advance understanding of the INSERT HERE. User Travb (We) believe(s) this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

[edit] Wales Shuts Down Straw Poll, Calls Fair Use Photo Proposal "Meaningless"

Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales has stepped in and stopped straw poll voting on a proposal to clarify the policy allowing fair use of promotional photos of living people. In addition, Wales blanked the page in question, while encouraging Wikipedians to engage in what he calls a "continuation of a healthy and robust discussion of this complex issue." Wales newly-blanked page failed to include a link to an area deemed more appropriate for such further discussion.

The page had attracted a fair amount of attention over the Christmas holiday season, with more than 85 editors and Wikipedia administrators making their views known via the now-closed and removed straw poll. Wales' message to Wikipedia editors seeking to change the current promotional photography policies was unambigious. "We do not vote on issues in this manner," the Wikipedia founder wrote in bold type at the top of the page. Wales also indicated the page was "meaningless," writing of the oft-contentious debate, "enough is enough." When shut down, the straw poll was running about even, with no clear consensus in favor of adopting a wording change in the fair use criteria permitting, but not encouraging, the fair use of promotional photographs of living people (including bands) in articles describing those people until a free alternative becomes available. Jenolen ^{speak it!} 12:12, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Old page: [5]