[WikiEN-l] CAS Discourages Using SciFinder to Help Curate Wikipedia

[WJhonson at aol.com]

In a message dated 3/8/2008 11:29:51 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
Brian.Mingus at colorado.edu writes:

If WMF's  lawyer is
willing to step in and say that we are not infringing their  copyright,
that's one thing, but in the meantime they explicitly claim that  we are and
you are not a lawyer. IMHO there are plausible arguments in  favor of the CAS
position that you are not  considering.>>


-----------------------------------------------------------
A + B does not equal 4.  Your argument above is not compelling.
We do not make decisions "under advice of counsel", we make them by  
community discussion.  The community, in this case, is hopefully wise  enough to see 
this sham claim of "copyright over facts" for exactly what it  is.  We also 
cite hundreds of details about movie scripts, and hundreds of  quotes from the 
New York Times.
 
In none of these cases are we violating any copyright, regardless of what  
any supposedly injured party might think.  If they do in fact this it, let  them 
send us a C&D officially, drafted by their lawyer, stating that.
 
They can then, cite, the exact case law under which they are making such a  
claim.  Otherwise they are just blowing smoke.



**************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & 
Finance.      (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)