Wikipedia:Files for deletion/Replaceable fair use/File:Nao Saejima.jpg


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of a fair use image as a replaceable image. Please do not modify it. 

The result of the debate was to delete the image. — ξ xplicit  00:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use disputed
This model is retired. Due to the nature of the model's career, and the tendency of such models to avoid publicity in retirement (see: "Ex-porn star wins settlement in Japan" for one who successfully sued for invasion of privacy), "free" photos of her cannot be made. Dekkappai 23:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I want to point out that existing copyrighted images can be made free by the copyright holder through a license or a complete release into the public domain. Whatever right of publicity an actress may enjoy in Japan does not override the fact that the copyright holder (normally the photographer or the company that paid for the shoot) controls how the picture is used according to US law, not the subject. Stating that no more free use images can be made available due to the subject wanting to keep her privacy is not true. Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This rationale applies to ALL non-free images. Is Fair use to be completely thrown out then? Dekkappai (talk) 04:40, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * From what I understand, wikipedia image policy is stricter than what fair use requires under U.S. law. The rationale does not apply to a particular image that may be iconic or completely irreplaceable (usually in order to demonstrate and discuss the specific image). When there are multiple images available to demonstrate a subject and some of them may be obtained freely, the rationale becomes stronger. Morbidthoughts (talk) 05:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * After reviewing WP:NFC, my very liberal reading of created free content does not apply. As long as no free new image can be created, it may be acceptable to use an old non-free image instead of waiting for the unlikely scenario that a non-free one becomes free. Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way it is a lot stronger rationale to note that an image of her looks back in the 80s and 90s (which is the basis of notability) can not be newly created rather than speculate that a new image of her in general can not be created because she is retired and is likely to want to protect her privacy. Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Damn it, now I read this "Where possible, non-free content is transformed into free material instead of using a fair-use defense" from WP:NFCC, and I now have a headache. Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.