[WikiEN-l] YouTube links

[David Gerard]

On 04/01/07, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On 1/4/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:

> > [[WP:COPYRIGHT]] makes it clear that
> > ''knowingly'' linking to infringing material is contributory
> > infringement (also that linking to copyvios makes us look bad). Given
> > that many YouTube vids are copyvios, we can be argued to *nkow* that
> > violation is likely, and looking the other way and whistling
> > innocently does not seem to me to be exercising due diligence.

> By that same logic, we ought not link to any site hosted on a free
> webspace provider like Yahoo!, since many of the sites hosted there
> contain copyright violations. I think that would be an excessive
> position that would deprive us from many useful external links.
> Moreover, many videos which are "copyvio" by Wikipedia's standards may
> well be found to be fair use by US legal standards.
> Use common sense please.


Indeed. I've had POVpushers remove links claiming "copyvio" when the
link-remover is working for the organisation that has failed to sue
over the last nine years of the page's presence because they knew damn
well they'd lose if they tried.

The question with anything in the external link is: Does it enhance
encyclopedic value by being one of the few very best and most
explanatory links on the specific subject of the article on the Web?
If it's video of the event that's the actual subject, it's relevant
for example.

For another example, see [[FLV]] - I removed the link to Adobe's Flash
page (arguably too generic to warrant inclusion in that particular
article), and added links to two pages reverse-engineering FLV
(because they're actually informative about the format).


- d.