On 5/4/07, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
Just to point out, we're here to write a FREE encyclopedia. If it turns out the **AA goons are going to successfully sue into oblivion anyone distributing the encyclopedia, then there's a good argument the encyclopedia is no longer free.
Look, don't be ridiculous. It's not the case that we're transitioning from a state where it would be legal for us to post anything we want to completely unrestricted, to one where suddenly there are now restrictions.
There have always been restrictions. We couldn't legally post Child Porn images to illustrate the article on it. We don't let people publish BLP libel or unfounded statements. We don't publish a life-size scan of a dollar bill on the Dollar page (it's about 1.5x "real size", presumably due to the size related restrictions). We don't have actual detailed nuclear bomb plans up on [[Nuclear weapon design]] article.
There have been no crusades to overturn those restrictions.
The fight over decrypt code was lost in the 2600 case [[Universal v. Reimerdes]], as offensive as that is to you and me and probably nearly everyone else here on-list. The Internet rather uniquely allows responsible organizations (who could be sued to death for statutory damages by the MPAA and others) to report accurately without the code, and for irresponsible organizations and individuals (for whom the statutory damages may hold little or no practical effect, as they have too little assets) to provide the DMCA-banned code anyways, and countries which don't recognize the DMCA to host the materials without even those restrictions.
We are an organization that would be in terrible trouble if sued for statutory damages for a thousand infractions of DMCA.
Please don't oversimplify this to a white and black case.