I don't think that the use of non-free files should be too easy. --Nemo 20:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
- In which sense? May you give some example? --Millosh 12:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. If there are two images, and one is on Commons, the other is slightly better but on en.wiki, you'll use the one on Commons, and wow, it's also free! If you can use in the same manner, with no effort, e non-free image, you won't appreciate the added value of free images on Commons.
- Moreover, it won't function: a central repository as Commons works because there are hundreds of users who spend lots of time on it to create a free repository. A non-free repository won't offer such a reward for such a tedious work.
- Finally, non-free content is usually language/country-specific. Different Wikipedias won't agree on the content such a repository should contain, and you'll have great copyright problems: you won't be able to move there fair use images from en.wiki because they're forbidden in other countries and thus on it.wikipedia and many more Wikipedias; even images which are public domain in Italy couldn't be uploaded. Etc.
- The Berne convention states that more or less public domain should be the same everywhere (for the m:rule of the shorter term), but exceptions to copyright vary greatly around the world. Such a project would be unusable. Even Proposal:Nonfree media vault or time capsule is more realistic (since it doesn't propose to use that nonfree content). --Nemo 12:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)