On 9/9/07, Axel Boldt <axelboldt(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
--- Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> wrote:
"Not perfectly clean from a legalistic
standpoint" is rather an
understatement. "Not even remotely legal" would be more like it.
Just as legal as the opt-out copyright infringement of the Internet
Archive, which to my knowledge has never been sued.
They have been sued (see for example
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/), and considering that
archives are explicitly protected under the DMCA I'd say it's a much
different legal position.
In any event, I
don't think it's important to follow legal rules just for the sake of
formality; the only thing that matters is whether your actions are
ethical and how likely it is that you can be successfully sued over
them.
Agreed, but not applicable, as what would be ethical would be to start
following the GFDL.
Of course, from a legal standpoint, that'd be irrelevant, since the
WMF has already had its rights terminated under the GFDL (see section
9).