On 5/2/07, Phil Sandifer <Snowspinner(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On May 2, 2007, at 11:49 AM, Andrew Lih wrote:
That's not Wikipedia's battle to fight.
It seems that Digg will be the
pioneer in that realm.
And here I agree with you. But the issue is NOT one of "blatant
illegality." It's one of legal risk, but we wade into that every time
we use a fair use image. The issues here are editorial, not legal.
What is the editorial issue which suggests that we should include
pseudocode for the MD5 algorithm, but can't include a key used in the
HD DVD algorithm? Or would you suggest barring any mention of
0xEFCDAB89 or d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e as well?