Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Erik Moeller wrote:
On 7/4/06, Anthony <wikilegal(a)inbox.org>
>It would also be nice
>to once and for all answer the question as to whether or not Wikimedia
>claims to be the "publisher" as the term is used in the GFDL.
Under US Law, Wikimedia is the "publisher" because they create
"collections" of works of the
Wikipedia site and "publish" them to the world as XML dumps.
Viewed by itself this is not a meaningful statement. Different parts of
US law (even only with reference to federal law) can define "publisher"
in entirely different and often contradictory ways. Any definition that
can be used for copyright purposes could be quite different from that
which is applicable to libel.
Whether electronic or in book form, they
are publishing. This being said, given the nebulous and undefined state
of internet IP law,
whether they are a publisher or not, there's no legal precedence to
determine liability, so at present
they are operating in an area of experimental law on the frontiers of