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

[Chris B]

On 11/10/2007, Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 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.
>
> My own sense is, most of these communities have borrowed the same
> image ad infinitum - Discogs may be an exception - but most "fans of
> band X" pages simply seem to use the same images that all the pages
> use.  Or, for the rarer releases, some of the images may be
> user-contributed scans, but those too end up then being on every other
> site, with or without attribution to the original site, and almost
> never with attribution to the original scanner.

discogs is the exception, then. whilst there are 'sourced' images,
these aren't technically allowed. there is an entire sub-community
devoted to the scanning/photographing of sleeves. i know from
experience it is the most time-consuming aspect of submitting a
release to discogs, if you want to get it right.

the difference between scans/photos of cover art than other music data
is that they are sourced and manipulated by an individual. whilst i
enter all the info from my personal collection into releases on MBz
and discogs, i don't kid myself that this info isn't available
elsewhere, just googling for random pages and peoples personal record
collection sites will get you almost everything about a release.
however my scans are made by me, and uploaded to discogs for discogs.

obviously *i* am happy enough for my scans to be added to MBz, but
lifting images wholesale is clearly underhand as far as i'm concerned.
it shows a lack of respect to the exact kind of people we should be
building relationships with.

also, if this was a valid way for bypassing artwork permissions, why
doesn't wikipedia, or any other high profile 'public' resource do it,
instead of having their own protracted 'fair use' checks and uploading
systems?