[Foundation-l] Litigation costs

[Ray Saintonge]

Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> Ray sorry, but you are dodging the point. The argument I made was that by
> entering content that is incompatible with our license you are in breach
> with the license. The license does commit us as much as it does our
> end-users. By knowingly entering data that will prevent our database to be
> used by our end users you are in breach of the license. In a same way our
> admins who allow for such data are equally in breach of the license because
> they have the duty to ensure that our product conforms to its intentions.
>
> When you are of the opinion that we should be prepared to litigate on this
> subject, I would suggest that you and everyone that agrees with you sets up
> a war chest. By putting your money where your mouth is, you are targeting
> money for confrontations. It is very different from sponsoring our
> Foundation. This is to help our end users when they are charged for using
> our data.
>
> It is all well and good to say that it is the responsibility of a person to
> enter iffy data. It is our end user that you say have to put effort in
> finding what is problematic. This is not realistic given the size of our
> projects. Consequently, it is our responsibility that our data conforms with
> our license.
Your approach is an invitation to rampant cluelessness.

Iron clad guarantees for downstream reusers are an impossibility.  
Determining whether a particular text or image is legally protected is 
rarely obvious.  That some idiots choose to repeatedly offer the same 
obvious material does not make the general case any more obvious.  How 
do you know when an apparently public domain text really comes from a 
European protected database?  How do you know that the person claiming 
that he is licensing material has the authority to grant that licence.  
Doing something "knowingly" requires more than mere suspicion that the 
act is wrong.

I did not say that we collectively should be prepared to litigate 
anything.  I proposed putting $0.00 into a contingency fund for the 
purpose.  Certainly WMF should be free to litigate what it considers 
appropriate. Saying that we will provide legal funding if end-users are 
charged for using our data would be utterly insane; it would leave us 
hostage to an endless stream of silly lawsuits when we have no control 
over that user's activities.  That includes people who only believe that 
they took the material from Wikipedia, lose a suit for using that 
material, then sue us to recover their costs on the basis of the 
guarantee.  It would be a winning suit for us, but it would still cost.

I believe in having individuals accept personal legal responsibility for 
iffy material.  Reusers can be warned when this happens, and they can 
choose whether the risk it acceptable to them.

Ec