On 3/13/06, Michael Snow wikipedia@earthlink.net wrote:
Anthere wrote:
Michael Snow wrote:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:
The designated agent is there for takedown notices of copyright infringements, and they have to be in writing, not over the phone.
Do you think that if the Wikimedia Foundation gets a phone call from someone complaining about copyright infringement, they're going to say, "Sorry, we're not going to do anything unless you send it in writing with all the elements required for a takedown notice"?
Well Michael...
In all good faith, this happens. Whether on the phone or on otrs, when the message sounds reasonnable, and in particular when it cites a book or a website where the image or text comes from, yes, we actually remove the image or the text, on the assumption of good faith.
When the request sounds a bit the one of a lunatic, we do not necessarily do so... We do not straight ask the person information required for a takedown notice, but we certainly do ask a little bit more information to justify the claim of cp infringment :-)
Sorry, I should have been more precise, but I was referring to the first type of complaint only, not random rants containing legal threats. Those get disregarded if the basis for the complaint isn't apparent and they don't comply with the formalities, yes.
--Michael Snow
Well Danny, by his own statement, refuses to give lawyers the number of the fax line, instead making them go through the charade of looking it up for themselves online. So I wouldn't really put it past him to disregard people who don't dot their i's and cross their t's. But none of that's really relevant to the point I was making, which is that calling the organization to complain about inaccuracies in articles doesn't seem to be an officially recognized channel.
Anthony