[mb-users] Using archive.org for cover art

[Philip Jägenstedt]

I think that both cases you mention only matter if we link a large
number of images from one site. In such cases I have myself contacted
and gotten the approval of the site operators. This isn't legally
required, but it's "nice". I personally believe that we in MusicBrainz
shouldn't disallow any use of archive.org, but encourage "best
practices" that cover the cases you menioned and others.

Philip

On 10/10/07, Chris B <chris at whenironsattack.com> wrote:
> when we link to an image on archive.org there is no bandwidth cost to
> the original site. if we have legal permission to link to an image (ie
> the original site it is an archived picture from had it under a CC
> license), then there is of course no problem using archive.org to host
> the image, as i see it. the problem is when we use images without such
> permission:
>
> 1) the fact that a site is available by archive.org (ie they haven't
> refused it via robots.txt) does not imply that the webmasters are
> happy for their images to be used by anyone else. it could be due to
> ignorance of archive.org, or perhaps they want it to allow archived
> versions of their site as a whole, with the images in the context they
> were originally provided, rather than isolated or worse: on a
> different site entirely!
>
> 2) in the event that the site doesn't own the copyrights of the images
> they provide (eg discogs.com), then we are basically using their
> communities hard work to our own end. they don't 'own' the images, but
> that community 'owns' the time that got them there. i think we need to
> respect that and not just screen-scrape.
>
> On 10/10/2007, Philip Jägenstedt <philip at foolip.org> wrote:
> > I would also like some clear points on what some editors find
> > objectionable, the discussion on the wiki is pretty messy...
> >
> > Philip
> >
> > On 10/10/07, Philipp Wolfer <phw at rubyforge.org> wrote:
> > > The problem I see with this whole discussion is, that there are two
> > > completely different points mixed up. First, there are legal problems.
> > > We might not be able to use a image due to copyright issues. Second,
> > > there is the problem that we can not just link to arbitrary images as
> > > we don't have the permission to use the bandwidth of the site offering
> > > those images.
> > >
> > > What I don't understand are the problems we have with linking to cover
> > > art via the wayback machine in cases where we have the legal (e.g. CC
> > > content), but not the bandwidth permission.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Philipp Wolfer
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > MusicBrainz-users mailing list
> > > MusicBrainz-users at lists.musicbrainz.org
> > > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > MusicBrainz-users mailing list
> > MusicBrainz-users at lists.musicbrainz.org
> > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-users mailing list
> MusicBrainz-users at lists.musicbrainz.org
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
>