File talk:Third80s.jpg

copyright

I hate to keep being inflexible on this, and I am considering some changes which will make it easier to use copyrighted works with permission. But as of now, I'm afraid I can't take your word, or even the word of the pastor, that the creator and copyright-holder of this photograph has, in fact, released all rights to it. A dedication to the public domain is a very specific and irreversible legal action for which I am not certain the pastor's word is enough to hold us harmless in case another party (the original photographer or printer of the brochure) later claims to have rights.

For now, I'll leave the image here, with the explanation, but not display it on the article page. The best alternative is still to take our own photos. At the same time, I'll try to get cracking on a solution to the licensing conflict between our Creative Commons license and the obvious benefits of reproducing works that people give us permission to show. Sorry for being so hard on this, but I don't have a lawyer and just can't take much risk right now. --Dystopos 18:50, 26 November 2006 (PST)

• well, for what it's worth, i'm both a member at third and an attorney (bar# ASB6725W58F). i just started the article at third at the encouragement of the pastor and other members. we have plenty of pics available, but no one knows who took them, they just belong to the church. but i really don't think that matters, because, i believe that U.S. law prohibits the copyright of any photograph of architecture and public, civilian buildings unless its value as 'artwork' is readily apparent, as per 17 USC 120. i could be wrong. i do have a pic i took (myself) today that is coming soon, but the purpose of third80s.jpg picture is to contrast the change in appearance the building has undergone.