Talk:Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Vanity Fair cover versus original photograph[edit]

I just reverted placement of the Vanity Fair magazine cover featuring the Leibovitz photo. The photo at issue in the case is the photograph itself; not the Vanity Fair cover. Since this is an article about the case, I think the photo itself (not the Vanity Fair cover) is the more appropriate image. I'm not sure what "fair use" rationale we might have to use the VF cover, when the Leibovitz photo is available by itself, and was the subject of the litigation. Can we discuss, please? --Lquilter (talk) 05:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the entire background section discusses the photograph as published on the cover of Vanity Fair it only seemed more appropriate to show it in its original context; besides the cover image is higher resolution and clearer, so simply for aesthetics' sake, that works better for me. Even with the all the magazine clutter (title, promo captions, etc) it's still easy enough to compare the cover with the poster. Lastly, when we have several pieces of non-free content when one can fulfill the encyclopedic purposes, it makes sense from a Wikipedia mission point-of-view to eliminate unnecessary non-free content. howcheng {chat} 16:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Given that it's been several days and you have yet to counter my argument, I have reinstated the Vanity Fair cover. howcheng {chat} 16:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Naked gun three.jpg[edit]

The image File:Naked gun three.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]