On 5/2/07, Phil Sandifer <Snowspinner(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On May 2, 2007, at 11:49 AM, Andrew Lih wrote:
That's not Wikipedia's battle to fight.
It seems that Digg will be the
pioneer in that realm.
And here I agree with you. But the issue is NOT one of "blatant
illegality." It's one of legal risk, but we wade into that every time
we use a fair use image. The issues here are editorial, not legal.
Yes, which is why there is a massive purge going on right now of fair
use images. Whoops, maybe not everyone knew that. :)
It's pretty clear the legal risks are pretty significant: Wikipedia a
top 10 web site and a history of the AACS licensor actions to much
lesser known sites
(
http://www.chillingeffects.org/notice.cgi?sID=03218).
Just because we don't like the law, does not mean we should be
intentionally dense about the implications of it.
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)