Anthere wrote:
While I was reading a protected article, I discovered at the bottom of the page the following disclaimer
This work may be protected by copyright. Please see 17 USC 108. This version of the article has been subsequently revised. Besides normal editing, the reason for revision may have been that this version contains factual inaccuracies, vandalism, or material not compatible with the GFDL.
I am *very* perplex. There are MANY reasons why an article can be protected on Wikipedia, and I would dare saying that having part of its content under copyright is probably the least probable reason for it to be restricted in edition. Protection is most of the time against vandalism or to cool down spirits. On the contrary, if an article contains factual inaccuracies or copyrighted material, it should be OPEN to editing so that it can be fixed as quickly as possible.
I perceive this disclaimer as possibly be meant to protect ourselves... but also as giving a very inacurate reason why we protect articles...
Second, WHY this reference to the US law code here?
Section 108 deals with the special rights available to libraries and archives. AFAIK There has been little if any discussion of whether we fall into that category of institution. This could eventually be a factor for Wikisource, but my first impression is that this citation is misplaced.
Ec