| Revision as of 21:20, 24 May 2017 editMasem (talk | contribs)Administrators187,869 edits →Diligence for replaceability← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 12:27, 17 January 2025 edit undoCactusisme (talk | contribs)213 edits Undid revision 1269999479 by 102.88.111.42 (talk)Tag: Undo |
| (39 intermediate revisions by 28 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Shortcut|WT:FUR}} |
|
{{Shortcut|WT:FUR}} |
|
{{WPFairUse}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
| Line 8: |
Line 7: |
|
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|archive = Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free use rationale guideline/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free use rationale guideline/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell| |
|
|
{{WikiProject Fair use}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{Archives|small=yes|search=yes|index=}} |
|
{{Archives|small=yes|search=yes|index=}} |
|
|
|
|
== Diligence for replaceability == |
|
|
|
|
|
Is it adequate to say that an image is not replaceable by free use options when we don't require (or even advise) editors to contact the copyright holder for a free use version? For example, it's easy for me to throw up a low-res, fair use painting or screenshot and say that no free use equivalent exists (and this is true) but doesn't it go against the spirit of the ], which is to first ''pursue'' free use when none appears to exist? I've contacted many copyright holders over the years and found that at least half both respond and have offered free use alternatives to our mutual benefit. <span style="background:#F0F0FF; padding:3px 9px 4px">]</span> 21:14, 24 May 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:You might want to reask this at ] since it is about NFC#1, but my stance is: we cannot anticipate behavior of non-WP parties, so while we strongly encourage contacting copyright holders to release for free, this is not an assurance that we can say creates a possibility for a free image to be available under NFCC#1. That said, there is common sense involved too. If a third-party copyright holder has granted free imagery of older works in the past, then there is a reasonable expectation to approach them again for free imagery of a newer work before resorting to non-free. --] (]) 21:20, 24 May 2017 (UTC) |
|
