Ray Saintonge writes: An important point; we musn't force the WMF lawyer into a conflict of The issue is only partly conflict of interest, and it often isn't that. It's primarily that WMF is not insured to give legal advice to community members. We run an encyclopedia, not a free legal clinic. (By comparison, when I worked for EFF, I was actually empowered to give free legal advice to people who called in for help.) It really feels good to be able to say "Make my day." More of us should You'll be pleased, I know, to know that I do get to say something similar quite frequently. There are plenty of bogus legal threats directed to WMF. John Vandenberg writes: In cases like this, I think it would help if the WMF lawyers would See above. It's also no secret that we have referred community members to lawyers in the past because we could not represent or counsel those members. This is what we did with regard to NPG. Sometimes. Sometimes not. (The issue is not so much putting lawyers in a tight spot as it is one of making WMF more vulnerable, e.g., by revealing defense strategies.) Peter Gervai writes: Or we can reasonably expect them to ask for real legal advice from (or What happens if they follow the legal advice from WMF and then face liability anyway? (This sometimes happens even when the best advice is given.) WMF is not insured against the malpractice lawsuit that community members might bring in that case. John Vandenberg writes: .. find generic legal advice ... or ... There is plenty of generic legal advice about how to respond to takedown notices. A little Googling will turn up some for you. --Mike