On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:23:01 -0700, Ray Saintonge
<saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
A not copyrighted response would simplify things,
but not so for the
contrary view.
If they assert copyright, then we should simply exclude the list. It's
not like it matters, we can have some examples, preferably in prose.
This does not prevent us discussing the topic of the Cool Wall, and it
does not materially degrade the article, in that it's not actually
necessary to have the entire list in order to understand the concept.
Guy (JzG)
Here is where I see the crux of the issue in this thread: you are not
interested in keeping the information in question. You do not value it.
You are willing to eliminate it at request (which is all that their
reply could possibly be seen as).
Wikipedia/Wikimedia was established (and I hope continues to exist) to
make information freely available. Caving in to unreasonable claims of
copyright is not the way to do that.
Note that I'm not saying that their claim would be unreasonable--I am
not an expert in copyright law. But your position is that their mere
request should result in our removing the information, when the question
of whether this is a copyright violation is still very much in question.
-Rich