Talk:Head Hunters (album)
|
|
| Template:WikiPortal Music | |
| This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful musical resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information). | |
| Here are some open tasks that you can do to make this resource better: | |
|---|---|
| Current collaboration: The Beatles' Revolver | |
| Albums that need articles: Crosby, Stills & Nash - Crosby, Stills & Nash | |
| Needs infobox: Ziggy Marley & the Melody Makers - Conscious Party | |
| Edit this message | |
Publishing artwork in its entirety from the cover an an album is copyright infringement. There is no fair use here because the entire piece is displayed, and it is thus usable as..a pirate album cover. Also, track lists are copyrighted, for the same reasons.
- If you don't agree with what is being done, please discuss it Wikipedia talk:Copyrights and Wikipedia talk:Image use policy. The album cover is being used under the fair use doctrine. It is a thumbnail, used in an educational and informative document; the cover could not be used as a suitable replacement for the original artwork because it is too small and too simplified to be expanded much larger. IANAL, but the only three Wikipedian lawyers to have opined on the subject of album covers (not in an official legal opinion) have agreed that they are acceptable to use, as have most of the Wikipedians who know much more about this than I. The track lists are not copyrightable -- a list of songs in the order in which they occur on a published album is reporting a fact, and is no more copyrightable than a list of books or wars or scenes in a movie. I don't think anybody has ever brought up track listings before, but if you think they are copyrighted, please discuss it at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights. Tuf-Kat 04:47, Feb 4, 2004 (UTC)
Please cite a US legal decision supporting your view that the use of thumbnail images of album artwork is not fair use. You raise several points which are worth responding to individually:
- Displaying an entire piece does not make something infringing so long as that is all that's required for the purpose, which here is showing what the cover of the album looks like. See fair use and the reasoning in the full decision in Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation for an example of full commercial use of a thumbnail (reduced size) image which was fair use, not infringement. Part of the argument there revolved around the practicality of using the reduced size image as a replacement for the original. It's not practical to use a reduced size image to create a sufficiently high quality image to fool potential customers for the original album work into thinking that the copy is the original, so it's not a possible replacement of the original album. That someone might make infringing use of the work, somehow, does not mean that the use made here is infringing - each use must be considered on its own merits.
- In the US, there is a mandatory royalty on all blank music CD disks (not computer CD blanks) and such copies are completely lawful, as are copies to tape, for the same reason. Using a reduced quality image on the case for such royalty-paid copies seems very likely to be fair use, since the royalty for the musical work has beeen paid.
- It's a long standing principle of US law that simple lists arranged in obvious orders (like track titles in the order in which they appear) are not subject to copyright. See Feist v. Rural and the related cases mentioned in that article.
- Given your claim that these things are infringing, I've listed this article at Wikipedia:Possible copyright infringements#February 4 on your behalf so that all of those who track copyright infringement issues will be aware of these issues and able to express a view. Jamesday 12:31, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)