Discussion utilisateur:Alexei756/Wikipédia:Fair use des images

RE: However should you encounter resistance do not dispair and abandon all hope!

Would not a serious encyclopedia publication simply say "I understand, thank you," and forget about using any image where the copyright holder resists? Anatagonizing one person tends to make others wary and too, from a publicity point of view, does Wikipedia want a reputation of being an entity that exercises "Fair Use" even when objected to by the legimate owner? JacquesD 27 sep 2003 à 15:49 (CEST)

That is the whole point of fair use, it has nothing to do with the permission of the copyright holder. Alexei756 27 sep 2003 à 17:55 (CEST)

super ! Yes, I think it is very valuable.

Qlq commentaires

Introduction

I think it would be beneficial to add to the introduction a simple recall of the fact that if text is under gfdl on wikipedida, images are not nessarily so. Then list the different cases. If I am not mistaking, public domain, gfdl, copyright with permission by the author, and copyright with fair use consideration. With appropriate links to relevant articles (what is public domain, what is gfdl, what is copyright, what is fair use)

Second, I will quickly indicate that fair use is one option someone can rely on, when the image is cp, and no permission was obtained or asked. To indicate that contrary to the other cases, which correspond to legal status, this one is more an "arrangement" with the law, a defense that can be used. I would indicate as well that many wikipedians are not really in favor of fair use (perhaps, link to Jimbo's opinion, and it is always preferable to have a free picture.

I think we need to be very clear on these points. To provide the best information, and save us precious time later on not answering over and over to these questions at le bistro :-)

Then perhaps (though I am not sure), remind users that the arguments over fair use, rely on answers on the later points :

L'objectif et la nature de l'usage, notamment s'il est de nature commerciale ou éducative et sans but lucratif ;
la nature de l'uvre protégée ;
la quantité et l'importance de la partie utilisée en rapport à l'ensemble de l'uvre protégée ;
les conséquences de cet usage sur le marché potentiel ou sur la valeur de l'uvre protégée.

What do you think ? Do you agree ?

Could you rephrase this somehow in english for a stable version ?

Most of the following text looks fine to me. A bit more bulleting to make some points clearer perhaps. Some links may be relevant (but will only be on the final language version). Some examples of each typical use would be real good as well (example of a movie poster thumbnail or manga cover thumbnail; example of an artist picture to put on the artist article only etc...). I will look for an example or two.

I saw a couple of lines that could be made clearer perhaps. Can't find them again :-( I have to go make supper, I will look again later.

This was great job !!! thanks a lot.

Anthere 27 sep 2003 à 19:25 (CEST)

Merci Alex, c'est très informatif. Je me propose de le traduire dans un jour ou deux. -- Looxix 28 sep 2003 à 17:53 (CEST)

Merci Loo. Attend qu'il soit stabilisé. Je n ai pas eu le temps de regarder les modifs. Il pourrait encore evoluer. ant

OK, je n'ai quand même pas le temps de le faire tout de suite. -- Looxix

I like quite well now, except for the bottom part of it. But I have the feeling the bottom part is somehow specific to each wikipedia. Hence, I suggest that we just work on that part in french when doing the translation. Otherwise, I think we are reaching the end of the points :-) ant

Voila, le premier jet de la traduction est faite. Attention!!! ça pue la traduction à plein nez, certains termes jurudiques ne sont pas traduit et certains passges sont une traduction littérale car, soit je ne sais pas l'exprimer en français, soit j'ai beaucoup de mal à comprendre le passage original en anglais.

Si vous avez une folle envie de repasser un peu dessus, ne vous gênez surtout pas!

Il faudrait peut-être aussi que l'on discute exactement de la politique que l'on veut, il y a aussi qq pasage ssur méta qui concerne la problèmatique du copyright d'un point de vue international (convention de Berne, publication papier en Europe, ...)

-- Looxix 3 oct 2003 à 02:06 (CEST)

What bothers me with the bottom of it is that it seems a bit to make the apology of fair use. To push to its use somehow; which is an attitude not widely followed. The german wikipedia for example, has decided that fair use what not authorized. Anthere 3 oct 2003 à 03:15 (CEST)

by the way, there are no reference to public domain. Is not public domain different from gfdl ? If it is, should not we mention it there as well ?

He, btw Alex, your proposition of mediation is very interesting. I will think about it. I think the "open" version should be preferred if possible. But "hidden" also occurs a lot. Usually, Jimbo assumes this position, as others go in hide, for fear to be pushed to hold a position. In any case, in my edit war against RK, Jimbo assumed that position. I had dozen of private mails. But there were mails of psy support, not of mediation. Mediation was publicly done by 172 and Slrubenstein. It made it possible to scream abuse privately, and to solve the article issue publicly. Not bad either. But I have little knowledge about how medition is professionaly achieved.