-----Original Message----- From: Ken Arromdee arromdee@rahul.net To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 7:50 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] A new solution for the BLP dilemma
Was he merely silent about the issue, or did he say "I own the copyright, go ahead and host it">>
The person who uploaded the audio program, received permission to do so, from the copyright owner. That however isn't sufficient for wikilawyers who insist that the audio must be obtainable from an official website directly tied to the original program and that any transcript must come directly from the original copyright holder, etc etc etc. Certified, stamped, signed, and laminated.
The point Ken is, everyone familiar with this case, knows what the evidence plainly states. It's simply a case of trying to excise all the evidence IDONTLIKEIT so that the original underlying controversy is obscured.
Now people going to our article on Matt Sanchez, can plainly see that it's controversial for... something. They can't see quite what or why. However the self-defeating situation is that all you have to do is google for Matt Sanchez and you can read for hours all the controversy, which comes up on the first page! And yet our article says nothing on it whatsoever.
Utterly... pointless.