On 5/3/07, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
For god's sake, the NYT -is- a publisher, and they linked to it all over their official blog. You think their lawyers would have let them do that, if there were any significant degree of risk?
Obviously they think the benefits outweigh the risks. But what does this have to do with my comment?
On 5/3/07, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 5/3/07, John Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/3/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
If they do DMCA Wired, then Wired get to go first!
According to [[Universal v. Reimerdes]], DeCSS was a single case that included all defendants. Does one party 'go first' in cases like this?
MPAA would loose nothing by including Wikipedia in a suit against Wired even if we only linked to the Wired article that published it, after all that was the crux of the latter part of the DeCSS case: 2600 deep linking to other publishers.
The thing is, the WMF, unlike Wired, is not a publisher, or at least is going to claim it's not a publisher. So the two cases would be inherently different.
Anthony
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-- Freedom is the right to know that 2+2=4. From this all else follows.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l