On 3/30/07, doc doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com wrote:
I don't know Florida Law - but if my knowledge of UK law would say that if harm is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of an action, and it is reasonable to take steps to prevent it, then a failure to do so is culpable negligence. We know the harm, we could do something, but we don't.
In the US a negligence requires a [[duty of care]] in addition to the conditions you outline.
It's also unclear what reasonable steps could be taken to prevent these things from happening. I guess biographies of living people could be banned, but that doesn't seem reasonable.
On the other hand, it could be argued that it would be reasonable to delete the article about Brandt, for instance. So in some instances of specific individuals that have complained to the Foundation about their article, maybe you have a point. But you'd still have to show a [[duty of care]], and I'm not well versed enough in tort law to discuss that part further.
Here's a hard-line rule that might satisfy the more risk-averse among us, but still answer the question of "what if George Bush asks for his article to be deleted". Any article about a living person is removed upon request unless that person has a biography in a major encyclopedia. ????
Anthony