[WikiEN-l] Jimmy Wales should reconsider

[Jim]

On 4/20/07, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> On 4/20/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
> > Failure to do so
> > is actionable if the content is illegal, assuming that the Board
> > is made aware of the situation.
>
> It would not be wise to discuss legal strategy in public. That said, I
> think the idea that Brandt's article is "illegal" is preposterous.


The fact is that his could be the opposite strategy - by threatening the
foundation in to making a decision here, they would acknowledge that they
are the final decision maker and thus bring additional problems. The
decision makers on what content to keep should remain a community decision
with libelous content, etc quickly removed by the community. The foundation
is only a provider of services and is not responsible for the content that
is put on those services, and to exercise any other power because they own
the servers would put their status as a service provider in jeapordy.

In other words - it looks like Brandt's strategy is to use legal threats to
get the board to do some action that will undermine their very solid legal
position.

Jim (Trodel)