Image talk:Kq 787.jpg

The result of the debate was kept; image is not (yet) replaceable. —Angr 13:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] December 2006

There is no way to take an original photo of the KQ 787, for this reason:

• it has not yet been built

Kenya Airways will take possession of the airplane in 2010, at which time it will be possible to take a photo of the bird on the ground (but not in the air, because 2 airplanes would never be allowed to approach close enough to snap such an image, without a specially arranged photo flight). Meanwhile, this is a publicity photo released to the world to provide publicity about the future delivery of the plane - there is no question of a pending copyright dispute, because Boeing and KQ want this image to be widely disseminated. Therefore, it does not make any sense to delete this image! Malangali 20:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

It depends on what the image is being used for:

• If it is being used to illustrate the company's new livery, then it is replaceable (see for instance this website: [1] and this image [2]).
• If it is being used to show that aircraft from this particular airline can fly (the assertion that the image must show the aircraft in the air) then any image showing any aircraft from this airline taking off or landing could replace it (see for instance this image: [3]).
• If it is being used to illustrate the upcoming Boeing 787 in the airline's livery then it is not replaceable at the present time, but will be when the aircraft type enters service with the airline. --Oden 09:57, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I can only speculate that intent of the original contributor was to illustrate point 3, because it came in a series of edits related to KQ's Dreamliner purchase [4]. I have been able to find copyright information at the Boeing website [5]. The image is available for any editorial use by news media. The image will be on the Boeing site until March 6, 2007, after which one would need to contact boeingmedia.com in order to obtain a copy. However, my best reading of their statement, "These images are available for editorial use by news media," is that their images are available for editorial use by media that provide news about the KQ-Boeing deal. Wikipedia would seem to qualify. Here's the Boeing release:

Photo Credit: Boeing Image
Neg #: K63391
These images are available for editorial use by news media on: boeingmedia.com
NOTE: BCA photo release images are available on boeingmedia for 12 months from their release date. For older release images, contact BCA Visual Communications Manager, Seattle Fax +206 766 2934

Not only does inclusion of the image on Wikipedia constitute fair use, but in fact it constitutes "intended use." Malangali 13:15, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

As far as Wikipedia is concerned, any image which does not allow for commercial and/or derivative use is considered unfree. Even with permission to use the image on Wikipedia an image is still considered unfree (there are templates for this: {{withpermission}} and {{permission}}). Also see WP:FU#Downstream_use. --Oden 13:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Be that as it may, your comment does not speak to the replaceability issue. Whether Wikipedia can use the image has now been clarified by reference to the release on the Boeing website. Whether Wikipedia chooses to use the image according to its policies on freeness is an entirely different issue, which should take place outside of the context of a discussion on replaceability. Whether or not this image remains attached to this article, however, is unimportant to me. (Full disclosure: about 10 years ago I did do some pro bono translations to Swahili for Boeing, presumably for their KQ-destined aircraft - the one I remember most specifically was "life vest under center armrest.") --Malangali 13:55, 23 December 2006

Wikipedia:Fair use criteria does not allow images which can be replaced, so a image should be deleted if a replacement could be created. The idea is to ensure that the use of fair use images is kept to a bare minimum and avoided wherever possible. One could question whether this image is necessary in order to illustrate the Boeing 787, since only a small portion of the article on Kenya Airways concerns this aircraft model. There are several fair use images of the Boeing 787 in the article on that aircraft model, which also goes into greater detail on the subject. --Oden 14:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The pictures used in the Boeing 787 article would seem to make the case that the KQ image is permissible, since the image comes from essentially the same source at Boeing as is used for the non-disputed images in the article about the aircraft. Again, the question of whether Wikipedia needs a picture of a 787 in KQ livery is separate from whether such an image is replaceable. We've already established that the use is allowed by Boeing, and now Oden has established that the use of very similar images is not disputed in other Wikipedia articles. However, nobody has proposed an alternative source of images for this yet-to-be-delivered aircraft, other than the artist's rendering provided by the manufacturer. Is there anyone who disagrees that the image is irreplaceable until 2010? Malangali 14:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The discussion whether Wikipedia chooses to use the image according to its policies can't take place outside of a discussion of replaceability, because replaceability is what's at issue here, and is in fact the most significant way in which Wikipedia's fair use policy diverges from U.S. fair use law. AFAIK nothing in the law requires content to be unreplaceable by free content in order to be considered fair use, but Wikipedia policy does make this requirement. As Oden said, whether this image is replaceable depends on how it's being used. If it's being used to show a 787, it's replaceable, because there are already 787s around that could have their picture taken. If it's being used to show the KA livery, it's replaceable, because there are already KA aircraft with that livery that could have their picture taken. But if it's being used to show the KA livery on a 787, and no such aircraft will exist to have its picture taken until 2010, then it's not replaceable. But if that's the case, make sure the article using the picture actually discusses the significance of KA acquiring 787s in the future. —Angr 15:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The image is used in the context of discussion of the Kenya Airways fleet and a chart showing the airline's future aircraft acquisitions. In that context, it adds information to the article that can neither be provided by an artist's depiction of a 787 belonging to a different airline, nor by an existing KQ non-787 aircraft. I should clarify - NO 787s have yet been delivered to any airline, so ALL 787 images are artists' renderings provided by Boeing, except for the photo of the nose section at the factory. As far as the Wikipedia article on the 787 indicates, the aircraft is still about a year from having its maiden flight.

Image:B787_Section_41.jpg —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Malangali (talk • contribs) 16:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC).

The heart of the issue here is whether or not the image is replaceable. Whether or not the image belongs in the article can be discussed on the article talk page.

I had a glance at List of Boeing 787 orders, and while some articles do have promotional material of the 787 others do not. The issue of replaceability also can affect the status for promotional images for the Boeing 747-8, Airbus A350 and Airbus A380. Of course, once a aircraft has been delivered anyone can take a image (like Image:Emirates A380 2.JPG). --Oden 17:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

From what Malangali said, it sounds like the Boeing 787 doesn't exist yet, meaning that copyrighted artists' impressions are unreplaceable. —Angr 18:47, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Until the aircraft has been delivered the image cannot be considered replaceable. --Oden 05:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.