--- On Tue, 4/14/09, Ilya Schurov ilya.schurov@noo.ru wrote:

Yes, it's clear. Nobody is going to require editors to do copyvio investigation of third-party resources before linking them. It's a conflict resolution matter: e.g. one editor claim that some site violates copyright and therefore we shouldn't link there, while the other editor try to put this link into the article and argue that copyright issues are not important here. ArbCom believes that the site under consider indeed violates copyright. Should we consider this as an argument to remove such link, or just ignore it?

Do you acknowledge that what you are suggesting would be immoral? Or is one of those situations were you believe the copyright claim is immoral itself and see the legal situation as some technicality based on a corruption of government? I know Russian copyright has a few areas that defy common sense.

Either way it would probably be best to follow to the rule of law, even when on stupid corner cases. Because in the long run different groups will have a different opinions on which cases qualify as stupid corner cases and always following the law is easier for the entire community to accept without fracturing.

But those are my personal thoughts. You probably won't get an actual straight answer here.

Birgitte SB