Jump to content

Talk:Jim Lemley

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alternative photo required

[edit]

Note that File:JlemleyUidaho.jpg is marked for deletion due to no license information. The photo may originally have been copied from http://www.uidaho.edu/cbe/experientiallearning/executiveconnections before being posted on Flickr. Fæ (talk) 18:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Irregardless, that makes it fair use, if their is no enforcement. The University of Idaho is not the known copyright holder. If no license is enforced, it is fair use. It is only a violation, if one uses that piece of intellectual property with the knowledge of a known copyright, and an illegal use of such property in violation with known, and stated terms of copyright. No such right exists to the best of my knowledge, and there exists no safeguard to protect whatever presumed rights exist for this piece of property, thus qualifying as fair use, under Section 107 of the Copyright Act. Also, if one wishes to claim rights over this photo, they may petition for its removal, declaring themselves the license holder. Until such an aforementioned event occurs, the photo stands as a lawful use of a digital image under US Copyright Law, Sec. 107.

Further more such a debate over fair use corresponds to the following understanding of section 107 if US Copyright Law:

"1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes, (2) the nature of the copyrighted work, (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

accessed from "The Conference on Fair Use" December 1996. Accessed August 17, 2010. Veritasenlumine (talk) 20:45, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that the University of Idaho reserves all rights for images used on their website. If you wish to dispute their claim then you need to talk to them. Wikipedia does not have any guidelines for accepting images on the rationale that a claim of copyright is declared but not enforced. A guideline that does exist is WP:NFC#UUI which is clear that non-free pictures of living people are considered replaceable when a free alternative might be found at some point in the future and consequently are not acceptable for use in articles with a fair use rationale. Fæ (talk) 21:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, even if they are the holder of such a copyright, the image is used for educational purposes (in accordance with Sec. 107) in an encyclopedia to better familiarize users with who the subject is. So even if a copyright exists, it is not in violation of the law, because it used for a lawful purpose. &, furthermore, just because they claim license over the image, stating any image on their website is their property doesn't make them a license holder. Calling a dog a cat doesn't make a dog a cat. Regardless, I will inform them, that their image within the confines of appropriate use, is being used on Wikipedia for educational purposes. Still, that does not warrant a removal of this photo, since it is in accordance to the law, and you as an editor can also feel free to broach the subject with them. Veritasenlumine (talk) 22:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, if they do release the image please use the WP:OTRS process to log any release email with Wikipedia. Again your interpretation of the law may be correct but Wikipedia has its own guidelines to ensure the Five pillars can be met (see #3) and it is these guidelines rather than the law that we use to govern allowable article content so that editors can write articles rather than the lawyers doing it. By the way, I'm reading this article within the UK rather than the US, so US law only applies in an international context and as then interpreted under European regulations for copyright before being squeezed through the somewhat arcane and sometimes unenforceable UK copyright legislation. Fæ (talk) 22:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I sent out an email. I am also awaiting confirmation. Unless they say no to its use, the photo should remain valid. Veritasenlumine (talk) 23:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jim Lemley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:51, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jim_Lemley&oldid=1203548083"