Image:Yuan-ti Mageslayer.jpg (
history ·
last edit) from
[58]. -- Collectively, these go way beyond acceptable fair use. First and foremost, most of them have bogus
Template:Promotional declarations -- apparently some editors think that anything on the web is promotional, despite wizard.com's TOS prohibiting redistribution.
[59] That aside, the use of these images seems to fail most of the fair use tests:
The "amount and substantiality" test: Huge chunks of image galleries have been co-opted. (In some cases, I think the only thing stopping us from taking the whole gallery was the fact that some holy symbols were available in more than one gallery!)
The transformative nature of the use: Wikipedia's use of most of these images is blatantly not transformative -- the images were created for use in encylopedic works about fictional worlds, and Wikipedia is using them for an encyclopedia entries about fictional worlds!
The nature of the original work. The bar for "fair use" is much higher for fiction than non-fiction. This is also why I consider the
Template:logo rationale used for some of these images bogus -- the images aren't being use to describe real organizations, they're being used to describe a fictional world. You need to do more than repeat the fictional details to constitute fair use of fictional material -- cut-and-paste won't cover it.
Effect on the potential market of the original: The copyright owner on most of these illustrations (Wizards of the Coast) has a long history of selling encyclopedia-style books about their fictional worlds. Our encyclopedia is in almost-direct competition with theirs!
These images are failing at least 3 out of 4 of the standard tests. I think they've got to go, before the situation gets any worse. --
Michael Bauser04:59, 6 July 2006 (UTC)reply
I support deleting these images and others taken from the wizards.com website per the
wizards.com TOS. Unless Wikipedia gets explicit permission from Wizards of the Coast to use these images they should be deleted. --
Muchness00:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)reply
All websites with copyrighted promotional images say that you may not copy them for any reason. The entire purpose of the D&D website is to promote Dungeons & Dragons. What's the point of having a {{promotional}} tag when you can't even use it? Anyways, anyone can already easily find the images at the D&D website for free, so it's not like Wikipedia is taking anything away from Wizards of the Coast.
⇒JarlaxleArtemis23:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)reply
Once again,
JarlaxleArtemis fails to understand the nature of copyright and fair use. I'm getting tired of this willful ignorance—it was already the subject of two Requests for Arbitration and numerous short-term and permanent bannings. Please delete these images for the reasons cited. —
Psychonaut23:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)reply
Once again, Psychonaut acts like a
dick and tries to get non-copyvio images deleted so that he can feel important.
This is a copyrighted image that has been released by a company or organization to promote their work or product in the media, such as advertising material or a promotional photo in a press kit.
The copyright for it is most likely owned by the company who created the promotional item or the artist who produced the item in question; you must provide source information as evidence of ownership.
It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of promotional material
to illustrate the work or product in question;
in the absence of free images that could serve such a purpose;
Apparently everyone can read except for you. The images in question do not come from a press kit or similar source; in fact, the source explicitly forbids copying. I think you don't understand that the terms "publicity photo" and "press kit" apply only to items that are sent to reviewers and advertisers with the specific request (or at least intent) that they be reproduced. Graphics appearing on a website are not promotional images unless explicitly marked as such. For a real example of online promotional materials, see
Democracy Now!'s publicity kit. —
Psychonaut00:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC)reply
I don't think you understand the conjunction "such as." It says "such as advertising material or a promotional photo in a press kit." I think you are confusing "such as" with "limited to." "Such as" is used to give an example of something. Examples do not cover everything.
⇒JarlaxleArtemis02:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)reply
The fundamental attribute of a promotional photo is that it is intended to be widely reproduced. If the copyright holder forbids copying, then it can't be promotional material. --
Carnildo20:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)reply
This is exactly right. The images are clearly not intended to be used widely, and are therefore not promotional. They should be
speedy-deleted for having the wrong license tag.
Jkelly23:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)reply
These images do not fall under the fair use provisions of promotional material. The images have not been released to promote D&D, they are used to decorate the WOTC website. Also, they are not low-resolution images, they are the originals, and furthermore, they are not being used to illustrate the work or product in question, they are being used to decorate the article. (Also, all of the reasons explained by
Michael Bauser at the top of this discussion are spot on) I shall now begin the lengthy task of deleting them. The images have been deleted, I don't have the time at present to orphan them - have requested the help of
User:Carnildo and
User:OrphanBot to do the orphaning.
KcordinaTalk11:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)reply
Image:Yuan-ti Mageslayer.jpg (
history ·
last edit) from
[58]. -- Collectively, these go way beyond acceptable fair use. First and foremost, most of them have bogus
Template:Promotional declarations -- apparently some editors think that anything on the web is promotional, despite wizard.com's TOS prohibiting redistribution.
[59] That aside, the use of these images seems to fail most of the fair use tests:
The "amount and substantiality" test: Huge chunks of image galleries have been co-opted. (In some cases, I think the only thing stopping us from taking the whole gallery was the fact that some holy symbols were available in more than one gallery!)
The transformative nature of the use: Wikipedia's use of most of these images is blatantly not transformative -- the images were created for use in encylopedic works about fictional worlds, and Wikipedia is using them for an encyclopedia entries about fictional worlds!
The nature of the original work. The bar for "fair use" is much higher for fiction than non-fiction. This is also why I consider the
Template:logo rationale used for some of these images bogus -- the images aren't being use to describe real organizations, they're being used to describe a fictional world. You need to do more than repeat the fictional details to constitute fair use of fictional material -- cut-and-paste won't cover it.
Effect on the potential market of the original: The copyright owner on most of these illustrations (Wizards of the Coast) has a long history of selling encyclopedia-style books about their fictional worlds. Our encyclopedia is in almost-direct competition with theirs!
These images are failing at least 3 out of 4 of the standard tests. I think they've got to go, before the situation gets any worse. --
Michael Bauser04:59, 6 July 2006 (UTC)reply
I support deleting these images and others taken from the wizards.com website per the
wizards.com TOS. Unless Wikipedia gets explicit permission from Wizards of the Coast to use these images they should be deleted. --
Muchness00:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)reply
All websites with copyrighted promotional images say that you may not copy them for any reason. The entire purpose of the D&D website is to promote Dungeons & Dragons. What's the point of having a {{promotional}} tag when you can't even use it? Anyways, anyone can already easily find the images at the D&D website for free, so it's not like Wikipedia is taking anything away from Wizards of the Coast.
⇒JarlaxleArtemis23:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)reply
Once again,
JarlaxleArtemis fails to understand the nature of copyright and fair use. I'm getting tired of this willful ignorance—it was already the subject of two Requests for Arbitration and numerous short-term and permanent bannings. Please delete these images for the reasons cited. —
Psychonaut23:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)reply
Once again, Psychonaut acts like a
dick and tries to get non-copyvio images deleted so that he can feel important.
This is a copyrighted image that has been released by a company or organization to promote their work or product in the media, such as advertising material or a promotional photo in a press kit.
The copyright for it is most likely owned by the company who created the promotional item or the artist who produced the item in question; you must provide source information as evidence of ownership.
It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of promotional material
to illustrate the work or product in question;
in the absence of free images that could serve such a purpose;
Apparently everyone can read except for you. The images in question do not come from a press kit or similar source; in fact, the source explicitly forbids copying. I think you don't understand that the terms "publicity photo" and "press kit" apply only to items that are sent to reviewers and advertisers with the specific request (or at least intent) that they be reproduced. Graphics appearing on a website are not promotional images unless explicitly marked as such. For a real example of online promotional materials, see
Democracy Now!'s publicity kit. —
Psychonaut00:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC)reply
I don't think you understand the conjunction "such as." It says "such as advertising material or a promotional photo in a press kit." I think you are confusing "such as" with "limited to." "Such as" is used to give an example of something. Examples do not cover everything.
⇒JarlaxleArtemis02:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)reply
The fundamental attribute of a promotional photo is that it is intended to be widely reproduced. If the copyright holder forbids copying, then it can't be promotional material. --
Carnildo20:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)reply
This is exactly right. The images are clearly not intended to be used widely, and are therefore not promotional. They should be
speedy-deleted for having the wrong license tag.
Jkelly23:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)reply
These images do not fall under the fair use provisions of promotional material. The images have not been released to promote D&D, they are used to decorate the WOTC website. Also, they are not low-resolution images, they are the originals, and furthermore, they are not being used to illustrate the work or product in question, they are being used to decorate the article. (Also, all of the reasons explained by
Michael Bauser at the top of this discussion are spot on) I shall now begin the lengthy task of deleting them. The images have been deleted, I don't have the time at present to orphan them - have requested the help of
User:Carnildo and
User:OrphanBot to do the orphaning.
KcordinaTalk11:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)reply