Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
News agencies often supply news, video, and photography to news outlets for use in their works. In most cases, they don't get this content for free, these outlets have to license their content from them for fees, which is why you usually see copyright disclaimers often on Associated Press reports syndicated onto
Wikipedia:Non-free content is an evolving page offering more specific guidance about what is likely to be fair use in the Wikipedia articles and what Wikipedia policy will accept, with examples. In general, the educational and transformative nature of Wikipedia articles provides an excellent fair use case for anyone reproducing an article.
In short, Wikipedia media (with the exception of "fair use" media—see below) should be as "free" as Wikipedia's content—both to keep Wikipedia's own legal status secure and to allow as much re-use of Wikipedia content as possible. For example, Wikipedia can accept images under CC-BY-SA (Attribution-Share Alike) as a free license, but not CC ...
The Wikimedia Foundation has been involved in several lawsuits, generally regarding the content of Wikipedia.They have won some and lost others. In the United States, the Wikimedia Foundation typically wins defamation lawsuits brought against it due to protections that web platforms receive from laws like Section 230.
Note: if no court name is given, according to convention, the case is from the Supreme Court of the United States.Supreme Court rulings are binding precedent across the United States; Circuit Court rulings are binding within a certain portion of it (the circuit in question); District Court rulings are not binding precedent, but may still be referred to by other courts.
A copy of the page source, including links to other pages on the same server which would not occur on Wikipedia or a wiki (e.g., a link to /home/news/latest.html) A URL, labeled as "reference" or "source", which links to a page on a copyrighted website containing the exact (or almost exact ) same text where the Wayback Machine verifies they had ...
Anything else may still qualify as fair use in the right context, but a fair use rationale is still required to use such images on Wikipedia. To obtain freely licensed images, you can take photos yourself and upload them under a free license, place a request for other Wikipedians to create such images, or ask the copyright holder of a non-free ...
Each use of non-free content requires two things: a non-free copyright license and a non-free use rationale. In almost all cases, one copyright license is all that's needed regardless of how many times a file is being used, but a separate, specific non-free use rationale is needed for each use because not all non-free uses are equivalent.