Brad Patrick wrote:
On 7/11/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Anthony wrote:
On 7/4/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
Erik Moeller wrote:
On 7/4/06, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
"Having an employee make ad-hoc, arbitrary and speculative pronouncements on the law without a clear policy from the Board to back it up probably puts the entire project into greater peril than the obvious silliness of the more ignorant copyright violators."
For the record, Ray, Jeff, Eric and Anthony are not employees of the Foundation.
I am, and I hope you do not have a problem with the idea of a paid general counsel having as one of his primary responsibilities the generation of 'speculative pronouncements on the law.' That is rather the point. My client, my ethical obligation, and the recipient of my professional legal advice is the Board. It's my bar card on the line. It is not my job to wax eloquent on the law for the sake of making people on a listserv have more to rant about.
Thanks for including the word "probably" in the statement above, btw. I'd hate to think you were taking a position without leaving yourself rhetorical wiggle room. That would probably' be silly as well.
For the record I am NOT an employee of the Foundation, just a schmuck working on Native American translations and helping bring Wikipedia to Native Peoples.
My background is well known and I've been on the receiving end of litigations directed at me by some very wealthy and powerful groups for years. My father was an attorney and I grew up surrounded by lawyers. Here's the bottom line.
You win when you are NOT involved in litigating AT ALL and when people can work things out. Going in front of Judge is the worst of all possible scenarios in a conflict - its like going to Las Vegas and playing high rollers at the craps tables. You have no idea what will be the outcome since judge is a fallible human being trying to listen to both sides and making sense of all of it and balancing the rights of both parties, and I've been there -- many times, and not as an advocate but as a party where my interests were on line and depenent on the outcome. There's no magic formula or elightened policy the Board or anyone can come up with in a vacuum that will be a magical panacea and protect them.
Wikipedia's current policies concerning WP:RS are outstanding and address almost 100% of any issues people can raise. When these polcies are followed, people have little to no recourse. The problem is one of enforcement of their policies, not the system they have created. Brad has done a job that is beyond exemplary in keeping the Foundation level and working out conflicts with Folks and Wales has a heart of gold that shows through like a beacon in the fog when you can communicate effectively with him.
I for one am immensely impressed with Wales, Brad, Danny and what they have built and I will support them to the hilt (which does not come easily for me). I understand the community issues and the incredible balacing act these guys have to do to make this whole thing work, and to be honest I am nothing but totally impressed with the progress they've made given the types of folks who visit their site and post troll bait and the antics of a lot of the folks that they work with and try to steer into a good direction.
My article was one example and Wales totally blew me away with his mature and thoughful handling of these people who were trolling. I can say for certainty the Foundation has things well in hand and as someone who has been involved in exactly the issues you raise in a plethura of Federal an State Court cases, they are good men, a judge would view them as good men, and their current policies, when adhered to, would protect them almost 100% in these cases.
And if they want to protect their rights, as far as I can tell, they are protecting the rights of the community and all of you to be successful. Wales seems to operate on a higher set of laws (or perhaps a more precise understanding of the one universal law), and his direction is sound (though eccentric) and incredibly productive. When the issue of the website came up, he stated he applauded this persons courage for promoting the pervasiveness of Wikipedia's content and said "I hope it goes back up", indicating he had already done his own internal balancing of the pros and cons -- they are his Foundations trademarks and his call on how he wants to use them.
Enough said.
All my love to all of you,
Don't worry, be happy.
Jeff