CZ:Proposals/Non-comprehensive fair use policy

From Citizendium
< CZ:Proposals
Revision as of 23:52, 18 February 2008 by imported>Stephen Ewen (→‎Q & A: + 1)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This proposal has not yet been assigned to any decisionmaking group or decisionmaker(s).
The Proposals Manager will do so soon if and when the proposal or issue is "well formed" (including having a driver).
For now, the proposal record can be found in the new proposals queue.


Driver: Stephen Ewen

Complete explanation

This is a proposal to allow six categories of media to be used under U.S. fair use on Citizendium. The six categories of materials encompass the most commonly used materials under fair use and are widely considered fair use without controversy. Allowing these now will free contributors in a needed way related to both current and future articles. This is not a comprehensive fair use policy, which can be accomplished later, by adding categories to this proposal, for example.

Stephen Ewen is driver of this proposal, which has been carefully thought through for over a year. Please do not change the proposal text without the driver's agreement. It will ultimately wind up at the Editorial Council, and all along the way people will have opportunities to discuss things, make criticisms, counter-proposals, etc.

Category One: Coats of Arms, flags, emblems, seals, etc., of administrative entities, political authorities and institutions

With the following caveat:

  1. The image should be of very good quality yet only in size sufficient for adequate displaying of information

Category Two: Currency, stamps, vehicle license tags, and closely similar

With the following caveat:

  1. The image should be as small as possible to adequately convey the information

Category Three: Company logos, trademarks, copyrighted packaging, and closely similar

With the following two caveats:

  1. For logos and trademarks and closely similar, the image should be of very good quality yet only in size sufficient for adequate displaying of information
  2. Copyrighted packaging and closely similar should be as small as possible to adequately convey the information

Category Four: Software and website screen captures, of the software or website itself

With the following two caveats:

  1. Partial screen captures of software should be favored whenever possible
  2. The screencapture should be as small as possible to adequately convey the information

Category Five: Book, periodical, and disc covers, and promotional posters, comics/cartoons, and closely similar

With the following caveat:

  1. The image should be no larger than necessary to display adequate information

Category Six: Audio and video clips and video screen captures

With the following three caveats:

  1. Audio clips should be as small as possible in both length and resolution to convey information. As rules of thumb, use "the 10% and not the heart rule", and don't use song clips over 100 kbbs. For example, in an article about a musical band, you can include approximately 10 second low resolution clips of songs, but if there is a certain section that is the main draw toward people purchasing a certain CD, its "heart", you should be extremely careful about including that clip
  2. Video screen captures should be used instead of clips, whenever possible, and neither should be larger than needed to convey the information
  3. No encryption mechanism may have been subverted to make audio and video clips (which is illegal in the U.S.)

Universal caveats

  1. Items may appear in articles only for uses consistent with U.S. fair use doctrine
  2. Items should be obtained from official sources (the originating entity), but may be obtained elsewhere if otherwise unavailable and faithful to the official items

General caveats

  1. Contributors are responsible to become familiar with U.S. fair use doctrine before uploading materials to use under fair use, for example, by reading http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html, and will be personally responsible for their own uses of fair use materials. The resulting policy should in no way be construed as legal advise
  2. The laws of some countries regarding the equivalent of fair use are not consistent with U.S. laws. Contributors should first follow the laws in their own countries. Other contributors where this may not be an issue are probably willing to upload fair use materials for others, in that case
  3. If an article is requested to be under dispute resolution, fair use materials should be commented out with <!-- [[Image:Fair use item.jpg]] --> tags until the issue(s) are resolved.

Reasoning

We have current articles that are going to continue to be handicapped without this. Led Zeppelin is the most recent. As well, some contributors have expressed that they are off-put about writing because we lack a policy that permits them the uses stipulated in this proposal.

Q & A

Feel free to add questions directly to this section, or just ask them in the discussion area below. As issues are raised and addressed there, they will be summarized here in this format.

1. Why are there "very good quality" stipulations in some places but not others?
For instance: It's very important to befittingly depict entities, but publishers get bootleg-worry at high-resolution book cover images. That's the principle.
2. Why didn't you include "promotional photos"?
These are made available under an implied license. That's the point of them. Fair use is not needed. For commercial reusers of CZ content - that's a matter we need not consider, but they will.
3. What's this "and upload and use only materials they will be personally responsible for using" "and will be personally responsible for their own uses of fair use materials" all about?
It's really smart to include that language in light of the The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. You can read that summary, if you like. The basic idea is that contributors are responsible for their own uses of materials uploaded under fair use, whether uploaded by themselves or another. The principle is no different with any other type of media, or the writing of text for that matter, it just bears stating here explicitly.
4. What's the point of removing fair use images from articles requested to be under dispute resolution?
In the legal world, offense at use is always the precursor to challenged fair use. This helps avoid both.
5. What's with the "closely similar" part?
It's not reasonable to try to list every possible item that would fit into the category in spirit and intent.
6. Add question here.
7. Add question here.

Implementation

Implementation will be done via a new fair use section of the CZ:Upload-Wizard, and simple, accompanying templates corresponding to the above six categories.

Illustrations and examples will be added to the final policy page.

Discussion

A discussion section, to which anyone may contribute.

The "personal responsibility" line has to go, for all material on CZ is the responsibility of CZ, and not any one individual. (In other words, CZ is the legal person, not some author. -- CZ is not a service provider unde copyright law, it is the legal person responsible for all content here.. Richard Jensen 14:10, 18 February 2008 (CST)

This is just a personal statement: I for one will have nothing to do with images if I've got to agree to taking on personal responsibility. I'm not a solicitor and won't put myself in a position of being legally responsible for complicated issues the ramifications of which I can't possibly fully understand. Aleta Curry 15:44, 18 February 2008 (CST)
no fear, Aleta. CZ is a US federal-government-approved not-for-profit educational corporation and it is the "legal person" responsible for all the images and text. Steve misread the copyright law and believes CZ is a common carrier, like the cable company, that transmits private messages without altering them. Richard Jensen 16:04, 18 February 2008 (CST)
the rules say Please bear in mind that, merely because you are the driver of proposal or issue, you do not therefore have the exclusive right to determine the shape of the proposal/issue. That should be determined first by negotiation with other interested Citizens. Negotiation is required--this of course is how CZ does business, by collaboration not fiat. Richard Jensen 16:25, 18 February 2008 (CST)

Moving along to that negotiating, let me clarify the personal responsibility issue in the form of a simplified question. Does everyone want Citizendium to be a publisher and bear legal responsibility for images uploaded by contributors, or should Citizendium be providing contributors with a publishing service whereby they bear legal responsibility for their own contributions. If the former, I am against allowing fair use on CZ and withdraw the proposal. As to the contents of the DMCA, people can read it and research it and make up their own minds about what it says just fine, without any of us telling them what to think about it. A helpful way to view "personal responsibility" may be this: If Person X publishes a book with Publisher Y, responsibility for what is published does not transfer from Person X to Publisher Y. Person X is still responsible for what he or she published. That's really all this caveat is saying! Stephen Ewen 16:29, 18 February 2008 (CST)

the author of a book takes full credit and responsibility for it and no one can change the book without his permission. This in not how CZ operates at all. Anyone can change anything, and CZ as a legal person is the responsible party. (All encyclopedias work this way, and all authors sign legal contracts to that effect.)Richard Jensen 16:43, 18 February 2008 (CST)
I think the propsal is a good one (except for the two words) and if Steve does not want to be the driver of it I will volunteer to be the driver. Richard Jensen 16:33, 18 February 2008 (CST)
Let me again clarify. Let's say you upload the logo of the Coca-Cola company, and place it in Coca-Cola Company, which has developed into a nice and neutral article. Then you go on a two month vacation. The next day someone comes along and inserts libelous material into the article, including that the logo itself was stolen by the company. A Coca-Cola rep sees it and naturally reacts. You are not responsible for that other person. They are responsible for themselves, their use of it. You are responsible for YOUR use of it. I tweaked the wording of the section to avoid the interpretation that the uploader will be responsible for others' uses of the items. Does that clear up the intent here? Stephen Ewen 20:06, 18 February 2008 (CST)

Steve, the reasoning section does not provide any reasoning for the details of the various rules. That's all right, I suppose--although I like everything to be spelled out and defended, myself, as I do myself perhaps to a fault--but at the very least it would be good if you would offer to defend, in that reasoning section, any particular point that anyone has a question about. Another good item to put in the reasoning section would be any general principles or rules or patterns you had when producing the details of the policy (and why those principles are correct). Go on into this in the section titled, "Let me head-off some possible questions"--why isn't that stated in the reasoning section? --Larry Sanger 21:43, 18 February 2008 (CST)

Proposals System Navigation (advanced users only)

Proposal lists (some planned pages are still blank):

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=CZ:Proposals/Non-comprehensive_fair_use_policy&oldid=411292"