[Brainstorming Thread] Revising the rehost rule to be more effective

So I've been enforcing the rehost rule across 25 or something network subreddits and I've noticed a few things:

• In most cases the direct link to the original source does not provide anymore information than a direct link to imgur (be the information context or who the photographer is).
• In some cases it is not possible to link directly to the original source (be it a photographer's website built in flash or simply that the photographer disables the ability to download or link directly to their image).
• To clarify: this generally occurs when a user can find a direct link to a version of the photograph (be it from a screenshot or someone purchased the image and then it spread online through rehosting) while the original version is built in flash. So when removing the image for rehosting the original is actually not able to be submitted so content is lost.
• It's somewhat arbitrary. There are cases when the same image can be found on Wikimedia which gets the image from Flickr through a creative commons license. In this case which one do you say is the original? The Flickr may have been uploaded first but they are both approved hosts. And you have to ask the question: does the photographer even care if you rehost the image? Generally they will allow you to use the image as long as you provide attribution.

There are several ways we can modify the rehost rule so that it is more effective.

We can:

• Provide an exemption to the rule if they credit the photographer in the title.
• Provide an exemption to the rule if they credit the photographer/source in the comments.
• Provide an exemption to the rule only when they credit the photographer in the title and link to the source in the comments.
• Make the rehost rule only applicable to sites that have some sort of lightbox page (Flickr, Smugmug, 500px, etc).
• Make the rehost rule only applicable to images where the original link does provide more information about the photograph (this is practically a rewording of the above but more general).

These are all possible ways that I thought of to make the rule a little easier to navigate and more effective in what I think its goals are (promoting the original & photographer). I'm sure there are better ways to solve these problems or a better way to combine these rules. Probably even a smoother way to word them. I doubt there will be a vote come Friday on this so don't start talking about how this will destroy the network or whatever the rhetoric is when a major vote is coming. I want this to be a thread where we can identify all the problems with the rule and then maybe offer ways in which we can solve those problems and hopefully by the end of it we can have some sort of a revision.