On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:49, Andreas Kolbe
<jayen466(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
Even this corrected version does not seem to be
right. As I understand the proposed law,
the subject would have the right for a statement to be shown, unaltered, on the page
(which
actually would be possible for Wikipedia to do, via a transcluded and protected
template).
That's enough crazy and against NPOV.
Speaking as a citizen of a country with a fairly stringently worded
"Right of reply law." I don't think it has ever been applied against
an encyclopaedia, or a blog or Usenet thread or anything remotely like
that. I think it is very cogently only applied to publications with an
editorial plate that says the publishers stand behind every word
printed on it. Which is not the case for Wikipedia, and would be
ludicrous to even contemplate.
--
--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]